Surveillance

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      The Last Honest Man: Frank Church and the fight to restrain US power

      by

      Frank Forrester Church sat in the US Senate for 24 years. His tenure was consequential. A Democrat, he battled for civil rights and came to oppose the Vietnam war. He believed Americans were citizens, not subjects. Chairing the intelligence select committee was his most enduring accomplishment. James Risen, a Pulitzer-winning reporter now with the Intercept, sees him as a hero. The Last Honest Man is both paean and lament.“For decades … the CIA’s operations faced only glancing scrutiny from the White House, and virtually none from Congress,” Risen writes. “True oversight would have to wait until 1975, and the arrival on the national stage of a senator from Idaho, Frank Church.”For 16 months, Church and his committee scrutinized the CIA, FBI and National Security Agency and their many abuses. Amid the cold war, in the aftermath of Vietnam and Watergate, Congress grappled with the balance between civil liberties and national security, executive prerogative and congressional authority.Political assassinations, covert operations and domestic surveillance finally received scrutiny and oversight. A plot to kill Fidel Castro, with an assist from organized crime, made headlines. So did the personal ties that bound John F Kennedy, mob boss Sam Giancana and their shared mistress, Judith Campbell Exner.Giancana was murdered before he testified. Before John Rosselli, another mobster, could make a third appearance, his decomposed body turned up in a steel fuel drum near Miami.One subheading in the Church committee’s interim report bears the title: “The Question of Whether the Assassination Operation Involving Underworld Figures Was Known About by Attorney General Kennedy or President Kennedy as Revealed by Investigations of Giancana and Rosselli”.Against this grizzly but intriguing backdrop, Risen’s book is aptly subtitled: The CIA, the FBI, the Mafia, and the Kennedys – And One Senator’s Fight to Save Democracy. The Last Honest Man is a gem, marbled with scoop, laden with interviews.In 2006, Risen won the Pulitzer prize for his coverage of George W Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program. Risen was also part of the New York Times team that snagged a Pulitzer in the aftermath of September 11. He endured a seven-year legal battle with the Bush and Obama justice departments, for refusing to name a source. Eric Holder, Barack Obama’s attorney general, backed off. But he earned Risen’s lasting ire.In 2015, Risen called the Obama administration “the greatest enemy of press freedom in a generation”. Holder, he said, “has done the bidding of the intelligence community and the White House to damage press freedom in the United States”.And then came Donald Trump.Risen now describes Dick Cheney’s efforts to block Church’s committee, as chief of staff to Gerald Ford. To Cheney’s consternation, the president “refused to engage in an all-out war”. So Cheney nursed a grudge and bided his time.In 1987, Cheney and congressional Republicans issued a dissent on Iran-Contra, blaming the Church committee for the concept of “all but unlimited congressional power”. Later, as vice-president to George W Bush, Cheney zestily embraced the theory of the unitary executive, the global “war on terror” and the invasion of Iraq.The Last Honest Man also doubles as a guide to high-stakes politics. Risen captures Gary Hart and the late Walter Mondale on the record. Both Democratic presidential hopefuls – Mondale the candidate in 1984, Hart the frontrunner, briefly, in the 1988 race – after sitting on Church’s committee. The three senators were competitors and colleagues. Paths and ambitions intersected.Church entered the 1976 Democratic presidential primary late – and lost to Jimmy Carter. Carter weighed picking Church as his running mate but opted for Mondale instead.“I think he had seen me on a Sunday news talk show, talking about the Church committee, and he liked how I looked and sounded,” Mondale told Risen.It was for the best. Church never cottoned to Carter, failing hide his disdain. Carter and his aides returned the favor. They “hated Church right back”. David Aaron, a Church aide and later deputy to Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter’s national security adviser, recalls: “I know that whenever Church’s name came up, Brzezinski would grimace.”In 1980, Ronald Reagan and George HW Bush beat Carter and Mondale in a landslide. The election also cost Church his seat and the Democrats control of the Senate. Four years later, Mondale bested Hart for the Democratic nomination, only to be shellacked by Reagan-Bush again.Daniel Ellsberg, the Pentagon Papers whistleblower, leaves his mark on Risen’s pages too. He played a “previously undisclosed role in the Church committee’s investigation of the assassinations of foreign leaders”, Risen reports in a lengthy footnote.In an interview, Ellsberg says he “met privately” with Church in 1975, as the committee investigated assassination plots. In Risen’s telling, Ellsberg cops to handing Church “a manilla envelope containing copies of a series of top-secret cables” between the US embassy in South Vietnam and “the Kennedy White House”.The messages purportedly pertained to the “US role in the planning of the 1963 coup against South Vietnamese president [Ngô Đình] Diệm that resulted in his assassination”. The Church committee interim report referred to cable traffic between the embassy in Saigon and the White House but contained no mention of Ellsberg.In other words, assassinations and coups carry a bipartisan legacy. It wasn’t just Eisenhower and Nixon, Iran and Chile.Risen hails Church as “an American Cicero” who “offered the United States a brief glimpse of what it would be like to turn away from its imperialistic ambitions … and return to its roots as a republic”.He overstates, but not by much. Iraq and its aftermath still reverberate. But for that debacle, it is unlikely Trumpism would have attained the purchase it still possesses. Our national divide would not be as deep – or intractable. Church died in April 1984, aged just 59.
      The Last Honest Man: The CIA, the FBI, the Mafia, and the Kennedys – And One Senator’s Fight to Save Democracy is published in the US by Hachette More

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden administration urges Congress to renew warrantless surveillance law

      by

      Biden administration urges Congress to renew warrantless surveillance lawSection 702 cast as an essential tool to gather intelligence about terrorists and other foreign targets located overseasThe Biden administration has formally urged Congress to reauthorize a high-profile warrantless surveillance program, warning in a letter to top lawmakers that allowing the provision to expire could sharply limit the intelligence on foreign threats and targets the government collects.The law – named section 702 – allows the US government to collect the communications of targeted foreigners abroad by compelling service providers like Google to produce copies of messages and internet data, or networks like Verizon to intercept and turn over phone call and message data.Biden administration under pressure as Israel-Palestine violence escalatesRead moreBut the law is controversial because it allows the government to incidentally collect messages and phone data of Americans without a court order if they interacted with the foreign target, even though the law prohibits section 702 from being used by the NSA to specifically target US citizens.The administration’s efforts to reauthorize section 702 as it currently stands could face increased resistance this year, with Republicans on the House judiciary committee sharing Donald Trump’s distrust of intelligence agencies and past FBI errors in using the warrantless surveillance authority.To that end, the administration moved to cast the provision that would otherwise expire at the end of 2023 as an essential tool to gather intelligence about terrorists, weapons proliferators, hackers and other foreign targets located overseas who use US telecommunication providers.“The information acquired using Section 702 plays a key role in keeping the United States, its citizens, and its allies safe,” the Attorney General Merrick Garland and the director of national intelligence, Avril Haines, wrote in the letter sent Monday. “There is no way to replicate Section 702’s speed, reliability, specificity and insight.”Congress enacted section 702 as part of a 2008 amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 that legalized the kind of surveillance used in the secret “Stellarwind” warrantless wiretapping program authorized by George Bush after the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks.The provision continues to be used as a counterintelligence tool, the letter said, and played a role in the drone strike last year that killed al-Qaida leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri. Section 702 information remains a large portion of the presidential daily brief, a source familiar with the matter added.But the government has moved to use the full scope of the powers from section 702, including as it applies to US citizens.When the NSA collects incidental intercepts between foreign targets and Americans, it generally stores the raw messages for five years in a searchable database where agents can use Americans’ identifiers – like names, email addresses, phone numbers and social security numbers – to filter results.The database is also accessible to the FBI for domestic investigations in certain circumstances, in a practice decried by civil liberties groups as a “back door search loophole” to the fourth amendment requirement that the government obtain search warrants to access Americans’ private communications.For Americans’ information, the NSA, CIA and National Counterterrorism Center need a reason to believe the surveillance would reveal information about foreign intelligence. Since 2018, the FBI has needed a court order to review anything in criminal investigations with no link to national security.The recent requirement for the FBI came in part after an inspector general report found repeated errors and omissions during its Russia investigation in applications for FISA wiretaps against Trump 2016 campaign aide Carter Page – though the authority for that kind of wiretapping is not the one that is expiring.The FBI missteps with Page has led Trump allies on Capitol Hill, most notably the Republican chair of the House judiciary committee Jim Jordan who shares jurisdiction over FISA with the intelligence committee, to tell Fox News last year: “I think we should not even reauthorize FISA.”The letter to top lawmakers came as the head of the US justice department’s national security division and former FBI official Matthew Olsen made the case for reauthorizing section 702 in remarks at the Brookings Institute in Washington, DC.“Its value cannot be overstated,” Olsen said. “Without 702, we will lose indispensable intelligence for our decision makers and warfighters, as well as those of our allies. And we have no fallback authority that could come close to making up for that loss.”TopicsBiden administrationSurveillanceUS politicsUS CongressnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Tuesday briefing: Why is the US suddenly spying so many UFOs?

      by

      Tuesday briefing: Why is the US suddenly spying so many UFOs?In today’s newsletter: The use of surveillance balloons has gone largely under the radar until several floating orbs were shot down in North America. But China’s not the only country full of hot air – a look at this mysterious twist in international espionage

      Sign up here for our daily newsletter, First Edition
      Good morning. UFOs are being shot down over North America, and one of them is octagonal. OK, that’s a slightly breathless account of events since a Chinese balloon was sighted over Montana 10 days ago, and aliens probably aren’t involved – but the full story is almost as interesting.After that first balloon was brought down and US secretary of state Anthony Blinken postponed a trip to Beijing in response, three other mysterious objects have been taken out in US and Canadian airspace in the last few days – the last of them an “octagonal structure” with strings attached to it. The US views them as potential surveillance tools.China says the first one was a weather balloon, and in any case claims the US does the same thing itself. The US hotly denies it. UK defence secretary Ben Wallace says the UK will conduct a security review of its own airspace in response. Now, as debris from the first balloon is recovered from the Atlantic Ocean, a diplomatic spat that started with literal hot air is floating into the stratosphere.What on earth is going on here? Are balloons seriously part of the cutting edge of international espionage? And what exactly was that octagon? For today’s newsletter, Dr David Jordan, co-director of the Freeman Air and Space Institute at King’s College London and a director of the RAF Centre for Air and Space Power Studies, helps us towards some answers. The truth is out there, and after the headlines.Five big stories
      Policing | Police missed clear chances to identify Wayne Couzens as a danger to women before he murdered Sarah Everard, it emerged as he pleaded guilty to three offences of indecent exposure on Monday. Witnesses recorded either full or partial registration details of vehicles Couzens used, but the cases were not linked to the then-Metropolitan police officer.
      Turkey-Syria earthquake | Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, a Syrian rebel leader with a $10m US government bounty on his head, has made an urgent appeal for international aid to Idlib, a province in the north-west under opposition control. Meanwhile, Syrian regime leader Bashar al-Assad has agreed to open two border crossing points with Turkey to allow more emergency aid to the regoin.
      UK news | The family of Brianna Ghey, a 16-year-old from Warrington who was stabbed to death on Saturday, said her death “has left a massive hole in our family”. They described Brianna, who was transgender, as “strong, fearless and one-of-a-kind”, and thanked the public for their support.
      Israel | Tens of thousands of Israelis gathered in Jerusalem to protest against legislation introduced by the country’s hard-right government aimed at overhauling the judicial system. The changes, which give politicians greater control over the supreme court, could help prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu avoid conviction in his corruption trial, in which he denies all charges.
      Fan safety | Uefa bears “primary responsibility” for the catastrophic failures that turned last season’s Champions League final into a horrific experience for thousands of supporters, the organisation’s own review has concluded. The report found no evidence for claims that Liverpool fans were at fault.
      In depth: What’s behind the stratospheric attempts to protect US and Canadian airspace?Shortly after he left work on 1 February, Chase Doak spotted a mysterious white orb floating far above him. He decided to film it. “I am sitting in my driveway here in Billings, Montana … and this thing is up in the sky,” he said, in a video that went viral. “And I have no idea what it is.”Three days later, after identifying the orb as a Chinese surveillance balloon, the US shot it down. A week after that, last Friday, the US shot down another flying object off the coast of Alaska. On Saturday, a US jet acting on US and Canadian orders shot down another over Canada’s Yukon territory. On Sunday, that aforementioned octagonal thing was shot down over Lake Huron on the US-Canada border. (Leyland Cecco reports on local residents’ utter bafflement.) And overnight, the US military said it had recovered “significant debris” (pictured above) from the first incident.Dr David Jordan, an expert in air power and defence, has not previously been asked to give an interview about balloons. “The military use of balloons hasn’t gained much attention recently,” he said. “But it’s fair to say, no pun intended, that it probably goes on under the radar.”Why is the US suddenly spotting so many UFOs and balloons?While it’s quite exciting to imagine a sudden abundance of mysterious objects prowling North American skies, part of the explanation is comically prosaic: it looks like the US has just turned up the radar a bit.Melissa Dalton, the US assistant secretary of defence, said on Sunday: “We have been more closely scrutinising our airspace at these altitudes, including enhancing our radar, which may at least partly explain the increase in objects.”That doesn’t really clear up whether this is a new problem or something ongoing that nobody’s been monitoring, though. “It might be a bit of both,” Jordan said. “It’s entirely understandable they haven’t been looking for them because you pick up so much other stuff like hobby drones, weather balloons – you get to a stage where it’s a bit, ‘Is it a bird, is it a plane?’ (Here’s a fascinating piece by Jonathan Yerushalmy explaining the problem of ‘sky trash’.)“But if you start to think – hang on, are we in a situation where a potential adversary is using these craft to conduct surveillance based on knowing it’s written off as clutter, they will want to go back and check. If it turns out it’s been going for a while, they will leave the filters turned off.”Why might they be useful?Balloons are useful tools for gathering intelligence, in part because they can stay in one place more easily than a satellite. “They help you maintain a fairly persistent surveillance capability,” Jordan said. “And you can launch them relatively covertly. A satellite launch is going to be detected – there’s not much to stop you letting a balloon off.”While satellites will remain the dominant means of collecting intelligence on what’s going on on foreign soil, they have downsides. “The Chinese have used dazzling lasers to block them,” Jordan said. “And the Americans know when satellites are passing over sensitive locations – so you get a window when you’ll be out of sight.”On the other hand, as James Lewis of the US thinktank the Center for Strategic and International Studies pointed out in this global overview of the use of the “poor man’s satellite”, balloons have issues of their own. “They go where the winds take them,” he said. “I’m surprised the Chinese would resort to it … Why not just send a guy in a campervan to drive around?”That might suggest a motive beyond pure intelligence. “It may be they’re sending a message – saying look, your vaunted air differences can’t stop us flying things over your territory,” Jordan said. “If it’s that sort of cunning wheeze, it has a limited lifespan, but it might still have been good while it lasted.”Is China the only country doing this?It’s worth noting that only the first object has been definitively attributed to China. On Monday, Beijing accused the US of flying its own balloons over Chinese airspace more than 10 times since the beginning of last year. While the US flatly denies that claim – and it seems surprising that it would only come up now – it is certainly true that China is not alone in seeing potential in their use.The US has significantly increased its investment in balloon projects: it went from spending $3.8m over the last two years to more than $27m in 2023, Politico reported – a marginal sum against the vast defence budget, but still a big change.The UK is also developing its own programme. The Ministry of Defence’s 2021 tender for a £100m contract, Project Aether, said the UK was seeking to strengthen its capacity for “Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance using Stratospheric Uncrewed Air Systems.”Even so, it doesn’t necessarily follow that the Chinese claim of US operations in its airspace are true. “My gut feeling is that it’s unlikely,” said Jordan. “You can pick up an awful lot of information from international airspace.”What was that octagon, then?There have been conflicting views from US officials over whether the objects sighted over Yukon and Alaska can be categorised as balloons, with little detail beyond the admirably specific line that they are about the size of “a Volkswagen Beetle”. None of that explains the “octagonal structure” shot down over Lake Huron in Michigan on Saturday.Part of the giddy fascination prompted by that incident was the result of a response from General Glen VanHerck, head of North American Aerospace Defense Command (Norad), to a question about aliens: “I haven’t ruled out anything at this point.”Yikes! Other defence officials hastened to add that, er, there was no evidence of aliens. So WHAT WAS THE OCTAGON?Part of the mystery is the result of the fact that the only sightings were from fighter jets travelling past at hundreds of miles an hour, the White House noted yesterday. Jordan doesn’t know for sure, but he has a fun speculation, drawing on the example of the Coléoptère, an ill-fated French experiment in wingless flight from the 1950s: while no propulsion system was detected, it’s not impossible this was a high-end drone.“It would be very unconventional,” he said. “ but even without wings an octagon could have an aerodynamically viable system with an engine piloted remotely – that would be sophisticated, but not revolutionary.” Again: probably not aliens, though.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIs North American airspace really what’s important here?Probably not. While the subject has come to the fore because of what started in Montana, balloons may be a more pressing issue in Taiwan, as part of preparation for a possible future Chinese invasion.On Sunday, the FT reported (£) that dozens of Chinese military balloons had been observed over Taiwan in recent years, with the most recent just a few weeks ago.Such operations are far more militarily relevant, Jordan said. “They want to fatigue Taiwan’s response – but they don’t want to add fatigue to their own. If the Taiwanese feel they have to intercept it, you probe their defences, you inflict attrition, you work out their response times and their tactics and procedures. So that is a more significant development.”What else we’ve been reading
      Ruth Michaelson and Lorenzo Tondo have a devastating report from north-west Syria, where the earthquake “has compounded layers upon layers of humanitarian crisis in Idlib”. They speak to Mohammed Hadi (above), whose wife died along with two of their five children after she ran back inside their home to try to save them. Archie
      Jedidajah Otte spoke to the people who have gone part-time, after realising that they are better off if they cut down their working hours, and asks what the implications are for a shrinking UK economy. Nimo
      Stuart Heritage compiles 27 great tricks from professional chefs to make your own dinners seem a little more restauranty. Why has nobody told me to put a teabag in my curry until now?? Archie
      Interweaved with the story of her courtship with her husband, Andee Tagle’s piece in the Atlantic (£) explores the enduring magic of mixtapes. “The gift of music curation is powerful, a love language to be wielded with care,” writes Tagle. Nimo
      After scenes of violent disorder outside a hotel housing asylum seekers in Knowsley on Saturday, Diane Taylor writes about the problem of inflammatory rhetoric coming from the government itself: “The government needs to extinguish its anti-asylum-seeker rhetoric before the situation becomes too out of control to be reined in.” Archie
      SportFootball | Czech Republic international Jakub Jankto came out as gay in a social media video, becoming the most prominent current male footballer to come out publicly. Jankto (above) said he wanted to “live my life in freedom without fears, without prejudice, without violence, but with love,” adding: “I am homosexual, and I no longer want to hide myself.”Cricket | England trounced Ireland at the T20 Women’s World Cup, bowling their opponents out for 105 before reaching their target for the loss of six wickets. Meanwhile, seven players picked up contracts in the inaugural Women’s Premier League in India, including a £320,000 deal for Nat Sciver-Brunt, likely making her the best-paid female team athlete in the UK this year.Football | Liverpool triumphed in the Merseyside derby, beating Everton 2-0 thanks to goals from Mohamed Salah and Cody Gakpo. For Liverpool, writes Jonathan Liew, “the hopeful reading is that this comfortable win against their favourite opponents can restore a little of the old swagger”.The front pagesThe Guardian leads with “Police missed chances to arrest Couzens as sex offender suspect”. The Metro carries tributes to stabbing victim Brianna Ghey: “Strong, fearless, one of a kind”. The i has “Hunt urged to boost defence spending – or risk failing to deter Putin”, while the Daily Mail says “Rishi: RAF are ready to shoot down spy balloons”. More surveillance worries in the Daily Telegraph: “Police use of Chinese drones ‘risks UK security’”.The Times has “Exposed, the secret plot to sink tougher sewage rules” while the Daily Express warns “Millions face maximum council tax hikes”. “Cost of living it up” – the Sun is angry on our behalf that an energy company sent 100 “reps” on a Maldives jaunt. The lead story in the Daily Mirror is “M25 road rage killer claims: I’m not a threat to victim’s lover”. Top story in the Financial Times today is “Overseas bets on Vodafone mount as Liberty Global takes £1.2bn stake”.Today in FocusWhy anger is growing in Turkey a week after catastrophic earthquakesIt’s been an agonising time for survivors in Syria and Turkey – especially those whose relatives and friends are still trapped under rubbleCartoon of the day | Martin RowsonThe UpsideA bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all badSuzy Morrison had been working since she was 15, but money always disappeared quickly: “I couldn’t keep hold of it,” she says. “I never learned how to save money.” Morrison developed addictions to alcohol and other substances, holding down a job and raising two children while also funding her dependency by selling drugs. In her late 30s, though, Morrison joined a 12-step recovery programme. But while her life transformed in many ways, her dysfunctional relationship with money did not change. So in 2012, after a lifetime in debt, she joined Debtors Anonymous when she was 61. Ten years later, she is debt-free and works as a counsellor, giving Addiction 101 workshops and webinars. Her life could not look more different. Morrison says she is more self-assured than ever. “I’m at ease in my own skin,” she says. “There’s none of that fraud or impostor thing. Becoming easy in my skin feels like a radical act.”Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every SundayBored at work?And finally, the Guardian’s crosswords are here to keep you entertained throughout the day – with plenty more on the Guardian’s Puzzles app for iOS and Android. Also try out the Guardian’s new daily word game, Wordiply. Until tomorrow.
      Quick crossword
      Cryptic crossword
      Wordiply
      TopicsUS newsFirst EditionSurveillanceChinaAsia PacificUS militaryUS politicsCanadanewslettersReuse this content More

    • 200 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      US courts must stop shielding government surveillance programs from accountability | Patrick Toomey and Alex Abdo

      by

      US courts must stop shielding government surveillance programs from accountabilityPatrick Toomey and Alex AbdoThe NSA’s surveillance of Americans’ internet use raises serious constitutional concerns, but the government claims a lawsuit against the program would compromise ‘state secrets’ Imagine the government has searched your home without a warrant or probable cause, rifling through your files, your bedroom dresser, your diary. You sue, arguing that the public record shows it violated your fourth amendment rights. The government claims that it has a defense, but that its defense is secret. The court dismisses the case.In-person teaching has resumed in the US – but electronic snooping hasn’t stopped | Arwa MahdawiRead moreThat’s precisely what the federal government has increasingly said it can do in cases related to national security – under the so-called “state secret privilege”. It can violate constitutional rights, and then defeat any effort at accountability by claiming that its defense is secret – without even showing its evidence to a court behind closed doors. The latest installment in this troubling trend involves the National Security Agency’s monitoring of Americans’ international internet communications.Under a post-9/11 surveillance program known as “Upstream”, the NSA is systematically searching Americans’ internet communications as they enter and leave the United States. The agency sifts through these streams of data looking for “identifiers” associated with its many thousands of foreign targets – identifiers like email addresses and phone numbers. The NSA does all of this without warrants, without any individual judicial approval, and without showing that any of the people it is surveilling – including countless Americans – have done anything wrong. This surveillance raises serious constitutional concerns, but no court has ever considered a legal challenge to it because the government has claimed that allowing a suit against Upstream surveillance to go forward would implicate “state secrets”. Late last month, we filed a petition asking the US supreme court to make clear that the executive branch cannot invoke state secrets to dismiss cases challenging unlawful government conduct. The petition, which we filed on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation (the non-profit that operates Wikipedia), explains that Upstream surveillance violates the privacy rights of Wikipedia users and Wikimedia itself. But the issue we’re asking the supreme court to decide has far broader implications for efforts to hold the government accountable for the most serious abuses. Historically, the state secrets privilege was not a basis for dismissing cases. When the privilege developed in the early English and American courts, it allowed the government to withhold specific pieces of sensitive evidence. As with other privileges – like the attorney–client or priest–penitent privileges – the sensitive information was excluded, and the case would go forward without it. Sometimes the plaintiff would prevail using other available evidence, and sometimes they would lose. But they would have the chance to make their case in court. In recent years, however, the government has invoked the state secrets privilege not as a shield but as a sword, to seek dismissal of cases even where the plaintiff can make its case using public evidence – as Wikimedia is willing to do. In 2007, for example, an appeals court dismissed a lawsuit filed by Khaled El-Masri claiming that, in a case of mistaken identity, he had been kidnapped and tortured by the CIA. The court acknowledged the public evidence of El-Masri’s mistreatment but held that state secrets were too central to the case to allow it to go forward.And in 2010, a different appeals court dismissed a lawsuit filed by five individuals who claimed that one of Boeing’s subsidiary companies had flown the planes carrying them to the black sites where they were tortured by the CIA. This use of the state secrets privilege – to dismiss cases – departs from the supreme court’s narrow framing of the privilege. The court decided its seminal state secrets case, United States v Reynolds, in 1953, after three civilians died in the crash of a military plane. Their families sued and requested the flight accident report. In response, the government asserted the state secrets privilege, arguing that the report described secret military equipment.The court acquiesced, but it emphasized that the plaintiffs could try to prove their case using other evidence. While the supreme court has accepted dismissal in a small set of cases involving secret espionage contracts, it has never blessed this approach for other cases, let alone ones involving allegations of serious constitutional violations. In Wikimedia’s current lawsuit, the government has taken the maximalist approach. It has asked the courts to dismiss the case on state secrets grounds even though the government itself has released dozens of official reports, court opinions and other documents about Upstream surveillance.Notwithstanding this public record, the lower courts threw out the case – without ever deciding whether this sweeping surveillance is constitutional. The petition we filed gives the supreme court an important opportunity to rein in these over-broad invocations of secrecy. The court should instruct lower courts not to dismiss cases when the government invokes the state secrets privilege, but rather to use the array of tools that courts have long used to adjudicate cases involving sensitive information – for example, relying on security-cleared counsel, as courts routinely do in criminal cases, or examining secret evidence behind closed doors to assess its impact on a case. Unless the supreme court steps in, the state secrets privilege will continue to be a “get out of jail free” card for the government – enabling it to violate the constitution with impunity by invoking secrecy.
      Patrick Toomey is deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project
      Alex Abdo is founding litigation director for the Knight First Amendment Institute
      TopicsSurveillanceOpinionUS supreme courtUS politicsNSALaw (US)commentReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      US Capitol attack: is the government’s expanded online surveillance effective?

      by

      US Capitol attack: is the government’s expanded online surveillance effective?The Brennan Center for Justice explains how the US government monitors social media – and how ‘counter-terrorism’ efforts can threaten civil rights and privacy In the year since the deadly insurrection at the US Capitol, federal authorities have faced intense scrutiny for failing to detect warning signs on social media.After the 6 January insurrection, the US agency tasked with combatting terrorism and extremism, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), has expanded its monitoring of online activity, with officials touting a new domestic terrorism intelligence branch focused on tracking online threats and sharing information about possible attacks. A senior DHS official told the Guardian this week the department aims to track “narratives known to provoke violence” and platforms that have been linked to threats. The primary goal, the official said, was to warn potential targets when they should enhance security.In the days leading up to the anniversary of the riot, for example, the agency saw an uptick in activity on platforms tied to white supremacists and neo-Nazis and warned law enforcement partners when appropriate, the official said. This monitoring relies on DHS analysts, not artificial intelligence, and doesn’t target “ideologies”, the official added, but rather “calls for violence”.The Guardian spoke with Harsha Panduranga, counsel with the liberty and national security program at the Brennan Center for Justice, a not-for-profit organization that has tracked police and government entities’ online surveillance programs, about the US government’s monitoring of social media in the wake of 6 January.Although DHS says its online efforts are consistent with privacy protections, civil rights and civil liberties, the expansion of social media monitoring still raised concerns, Panduranga argued. Without proper safeguards, a new report from the center warns, the expanded social media surveillance could be both ineffective at preventing attacks and harmful to marginalized groups that end up targeted and criminalized by “counter-terrorism” efforts.The conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity. Which US government agencies monitor online activity?Many federal agencies monitor social media, including DHS, the FBI, the state department, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), the US Postal Service, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the US Marshals Service and the Social Security Administration (SSA). Our work has primarily focused on DHS, FBI and the state department, which make extensive use of social media for monitoring, targeting and information collection.Revealed: LAPD used ‘strategic communications’ firm to track ‘defund the police’ onlineRead moreWhy do these agencies monitor civilians’ social media?The FBI and DHS use social media monitoring to assist with investigations and to detect potential threats. Some of those investigations do not require a showing of criminal activity. For example, FBI agents can open an “assessment” [the lowest-level investigative stage] simply on the basis of preventing crime or terrorism, and without a factual basis. During assessments, FBI agents can search publicly available online information.Subsequent investigative stages, which require some factual basis, open the door for more invasive surveillance, such as the recording of private online communications. The FBI also awarded a contract to a firm in December 2020 to scour social media and proactively identify “national security and public safety-related events” not yet reported to law enforcement.DHS’s Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) division says it relies on social media when investigating matters ranging from civil immigration violations to terrorism. Government entities also monitor social media for “situational awareness” to coordinate a response to breaking events.How broad is this surveillance?Some DHS divisions, including Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the National Operations Center (NOC) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema), keep tabs on a broad list of websites and keywords being discussed on social media platforms. The agencies’ “privacy impact assessments” suggest there are few limits on the content that can be reviewed. Some assessments list a sweeping range of keywords that are monitored, including “attack”, “public health”, “power outage”, and “jihad”. Immigration authorities also use social media to screen travelers and immigrants coming into the US and even to monitor them while they live here. People applying for a range of immigration benefits also undergo social media checks to verify information in their application and determine whether they pose a security risk. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agents can also look at publicly available social media content for a range of investigations, including probing “potential criminal activity” and are authorized to operate undercover online and monitor private communications.How has this surveillance expanded in the wake of the insurrection?The main new DHS effort we’re aware of is an initiative monitoring social media to try to identify “narratives” giving rise to violence. DHS says they’ll use social media to pinpoint tips, leads and trends. In September, for example, DHS warned there could be another attack on the Capitol in connection with a Justice for J6 rally. But reports showed that law enforcement personnel [and journalists] outnumbered the protesters, and there was no indication of violence at the protest. This shows how difficult it is to predict violence relying on social media chatter.How concerned are you about the potential for civil rights violations in the wake of 6 January?January 6 seems to be accelerating this emphasis on social media monitoring without sufficient safeguards. And the monitoring to identify “narratives” that may lead to violence is broad enough to sweep in constitutionally protected speech and political discussion on various issues. We’ve long seen that government monitoring of social media harms people in a number of ways, including wrongly implicating an individual or group in criminal behavior based on their online activity; misinterpreting the meaning of social media activity, sometimes with severe consequences; suppressing people’s willingness to talk or connect openly online; and invading individuals’ privacy. Authorities have characterized ordinary activity, like wearing a particular sneaker brand or making common hand signs, or social media connections, as evidence of criminal or threatening behavior. This kind of assumption can have high-stakes consequences.Can you share some specific examples that illustrate these consequences?In 2020, DHS and the FBI disseminated reports to law enforcement in Maine warning of potential violence at anti-police brutality demonstrations based on fake social media posts by rightwing provocateurs. Police in Kansas arrested a teenager in 2020 on suspicion of inciting a riot reportedly based on a mistaken interpretation of his Snapchat post, in which he was actually denouncing violence. In 2019, DHS officials barred a Palestinian student arriving to study at Harvard from entering the country allegedly based on the content of his friends’ social media posts. The student said he had neither written nor engaged with the posts, which were critical of the US government. In another case of guilt by association, the NYPD was accused of wrongly arresting a 19-year-old for attempted murder in 2012 in part because prosecutors argued his “likes” and photos on social media proved he was a member of a violent gang. That same year, British travelers were interrogated at Los Angeles international airport and sent back to the UK reportedly due to a border agent’s misinterpretation of a joking tweet.Is social media surveillance effective at identifying legitimate threats?Broad social media monitoring for threat detection purposes generates reams of useless information, crowding out information on real public safety concerns. Government officials and assessments have repeatedly recognized that this dynamic makes it difficult to distinguish a sliver of genuine threats from the millions of everyday communications that do not warrant law enforcement attention. The former acting chief of DHS’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) said last year, “Actual intent to carry out violence can be difficult to discern from the angry, hyperbolic – and constitutionally protected – speech and information commonly found on social media.” And a 2021 internal review of I&A reported that searching “for true threats of violence before they happen is a difficult task filled with ambiguity”. The review observed that personnel collected information on a “broad range of general threats” that provided “information of limited value”, including “memes, hyperbole, statements on political organizations and other protected first amendment speech”. Similar concerns cropped up with the DHS’s pilot programs to use social media to vet refugees.US citizens v FBI: Will the government face charges for illegal surveillance?Read moreWhat groups are most impacted by this kind of surveillance?Black, brown and Muslim people, as well as activists and dissenters more generally, are especially vulnerable to being falsely labeled as threats based on social media activity. Both the FBI and DHS have monitored Black Lives Matter activists. In 2017, the FBI created a specious terrorism threat category called “Black Identity Extremism” , which can be read to include protests against police violence. This category has been used to rationalize continued surveillance of Black activists, including monitoring of social media activity. In 2020, DHS’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis used social media and other tools to target and monitor racial justice protestors in Portland, Oregon, justifying this surveillance by pointing to the threat of vandalism to Confederate monuments. DHS then disseminated intelligence reports on journalists reporting on this overreach. Muslim, Arab, Middle Eastern and South Asian communities have often been particular targets of the US government’s discriminatory travel and immigration screening practices, including social media screening.How do you think the government should be responding to the intelligence failures of 6 January?A Senate committee report from last year found that DHS failed to produce a specific warning connected to what would happen on 6 January. An FBI field office had circulated a warning about an online threat with a specific call for violence, but it didn’t convince officials to better prepare for the attack. I think one takeaway from these failures is that broadly monitoring social media for scary things people are saying, without any further reason to suspect wrongdoing, tends to flood warning systems with useless information. This makes it harder to pick out what matters and sweeps in thousands of people who haven’t or wouldn’t do anything violent. Intelligence and law enforcement agencies already have ample and potent tools to investigate far-right violence without relying on indiscriminate social media monitoring, but they are not using these tools as effectively as they should. Instigators of the 6 January riot, for example, were members of groups that were already known to law enforcement. Some of them had previously participated in organized far-right violence, yet authorities did not bring charges or fully investigate the criminal activities of these organizations. So more indiscriminate surveillance isn’t the answer – in fact, such measures are much more likely to harm the very communities that are already at greater risk.TopicsUS Capitol attackSurveillanceUS politicsProtestActivismRacefeaturesReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      From Kremlin leak to sperm counts: our readers’ favourite stories of 2021

      by

      From Kremlin leak to sperm counts: our readers’ favourite stories of 2021 Here are 20 articles that may have helped convince people to support the Guardian’s journalismThe Guardian benefited from hundreds of thousands of acts of support from digital readers in 2021 – almost one for every minute of the year. Here we look at the articles from 2021 that had a big hand in convincing readers to support our open, independent journalism.Kremlin papers appear to show Putin’s plot to put Trump in White House – Luke Harding, Julian Borger and Dan SabbaghExclusive leak reveals Moscow’s deliberations on how it might help Donald Trump win 2016 US presidential race‘We are witnessing a crime against humanity’ – Arundhati RoyThe author and activist plumbs the depths of India’s Covid catastrophe and finds much to reproach the prime minister, Narendra Modi, for‘I’m facing a prison sentence’: US Capitol rioters plead with Trump for pardons – Oliver MilmanThe past very quickly catches up with those who ransacked the seat of US democracyClimate crisis: Scientists spot warning signs of Gulf Stream collapse – Damian CarringtonA shutdown of the Atlantic current circulation system would have catastrophic consequences around the worldAn Afghan woman in Kabul: ‘Now I have to burn everything I achieved’ – A Kabul residentAs the Taliban take the Afghan capital, one woman describes being “a victim of a war that men started”.Plummeting sperm counts, shrinking penises: toxic chemicals threaten humanity – Erin BrockovichA warning from the environmental advocate and author about the damage being wrought by toxic chemicalsPandora papers: biggest ever leak of offshore data exposes financial secrets of rich and powerful – Guardian investigations teamMillions of documents reveal deals and assets of more than 100 billionaires, 30 world leaders and 300 public officialsThe Hill We Climb: the poem that stole the inauguration show – Amanda GormanShe spoke, and millions listened, at Joe Biden’s inaugurationRates of Parkinson’s disease are exploding. A common chemical may be to blame – Adrienne MateiIs an epidemic on the horizon? And is an unpronounceable chemical compound to blame?Capitalism is killing the planet – it’s time to stop buying into our own destruction – George MonbiotThe Guardian columnist at his most incandescent‘Take it easy, nothing matters in the end’: William Shatner at 90, on love, loss and Leonard Nimoy – Hadley FreemanThe actor discusses longevity, tragedy, friendship, success and his Star Trek co-star‘Our biggest challenge? Lack of imagination’: the scientists turning the desert green – Steve RoseIn China, scientists have turned vast swathes of arid land into a lush oasis. Now a team of maverick engineers want to do the same to the SinaiOff-road, off-grid: the modern nomads wandering America’s back country – Stevie TrujilloAcross US public lands thousands of people are taking to van lifeThe greatest danger for the US isn’t China. It’s much closer to home – Robert ReichThe columnist and former secretary of labour warns of enemies withinThe rice of the sea: how a tiny grain could change the way humanity eats – Ashifa KassamCelebrated chef discovered something in the seagrass that could transform our understanding of the sea itself – as a vast gardenRevealed: leak uncovers global abuse of cyber-surveillance weapon – Guardian staffThe Guardian teams up with 16 media organisations around the world to investigate hacking software sold by the Israeli surveillance company NSO GroupBeware: Gaia may destroy humans before we destroy the Earth – James LovelockLegendary environmentalist argues that Covid-19 may well have been one attempt by the planet to protect itself, and that next time it may try harder with something even nastierThe Rosenbergs were executed for spying in 1953. Can their sons reveal the truth? – Hadley FreemanEthel and Julius Rosenberg were sent to the electric chair for being Soviet spies, but their sons have spent decades trying to clear their mother’s name. Are they close to a breakthrough?Out of thin air: the mystery of the man who fell from the sky – Sirin KaleWho was the stowaway who fell from the wheel well of a Boeing plane into a south London garden in the summer of 2019?The life and tragic death of John Eyers – a fitness fanatic who refused the vaccine – Sirin KaleThe 42-year-old did triathlons, bodybuilding and mountain climbing and became sceptical of the Covid jab. Then he contracted the virusIf these pieces move you to support our independent journalism into 2022, you can do so here:
      Make a contribution from just £1
      Become a digital subscriber and get something in return for your money
      Join as a Patron to fund us at a higher level
      TopicsRussiaInside the GuardianDonald TrumpVladimir PutinCoronavirusIndiaUS Capitol attackClimate crisisfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Reign of Terror review: from 9/11 to Trump by way of Snowden and Iraq

      by

      BooksReign of Terror review: from 9/11 to Trump by way of Snowden and IraqSpencer Ackerman, once of the Guardian, displays a masterful command of the facts but sometimes lets his prejudice show Lloyd GreenSun 8 Aug 2021 02.00 EDTLast modified on Sun 8 Aug 2021 02.01 EDTThis 11 September will be the 20th anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and the crash of Flight 93. Two wars have left 6,700 Americans dead and more than 53,000 wounded. After the Trump presidency, America roils in a cold civil war. In Afghanistan, the Taliban is on the move again. Saddam Hussein is dead and gone but Iraq remains “not free”.‘A madman with millions of followers’: what the new Trump books tell usRead moreIn other words, the war on terror has produced little for the US to brag about. In an April Pew poll, two-thirds of respondents rated international terror as a “big” problem, albeit one that trailed healthcare, Covid, unemployment and 10 more.Against this bleak backdrop, Spencer Ackerman delivers his first book under the subtitle “How the 9/11 Era Destabilized America and Produced Trump”. It is part-chronicle, part-polemic. The author’s anger is understandable, to a point.Ackerman displays a masterful command of facts. No surprise. In 2014, he was part of the Guardian team that won a Pulitzer for reporting on Edward Snowden’s leaks about the National Security Agency.Ackerman stuck with the topic. A contributing editor at the Daily Beast, he has also been its senior national security writer. Ackerman is fluent in discussing the so-called security state, and how it is a creature of both political parties.In the face of Snowden’s revelations, congressional leaders came out for the status quo. According to Harry Reid, then the Democratic Senate majority leader, senators who complained about being left in the dark about the NSA had only themselves to blame. All other Americans were to sit down and shut up.Nancy Pelosi, then House minority leader and a persistent critic of the Patriot Act, a chief vehicle for surveillance powers, declined to criticize Barack Obama or high-tech intrusion in general. Instead, she called for Snowden’s prosecution. He made Russia his home.Ackerman notes that the American Civil Liberties Union and Rand Paul, Kentucky’s junior senator, were notable exceptions to the rule. At the time, Paul remarked: “When you collect it from a billion phone calls a day, even if you say you’re going to keep the name private, the possibility for abuse is enormous.”Ackerman also shines a light on how the far right played an outsized role in domestic terrorism before and after 9/11, reminding us of Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City bombing, teasing out McVeigh’s ties to other white nationalists.The attack on the US Capitol on 6 January this year is one more chapter in the story. Trump falsely claimed Antifa, leftwing radicals, were the real culprits. The roster of those under indictment reveals a very different story.In congressional testimony in April, Merrick Garland, the attorney general, and Alejandro Mayorkas, the homeland security secretary, described “racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists” as the greatest domestic threat. Garland also singled out “those who advocate for the superiority of the white race”.Chad Wolf, Trump’s acting homeland security chief, made a similar point last fall. Of course, his boss wasn’t listening.Ackerman delves meticulously into the blowback resulting from the war on terror. Unfortunately, he downplays how the grudges and enmities of the old country have been magnified by key social forces, immigration chief among them.Joe Biden, then vice-president, condemned the Boston Marathon bombers as “knock-off jihadists”. But Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev had received asylum. The immigrant population stands near a record high and the US fertility rate is in retrograde. On the right, that is a combustible combination. When Tucker Carlson is in Hungary, singing the praises of Viktor Orbán, the past is never too far away.In his effort to draw as straight a line as possible between the war on terror and the rise of Trump, Ackerman can overplay his hand. Racism, nativism and disdain for the other were not the sole drivers of Trump’s win, much as Islamophobia was not the sole cause of the Iraq war, a conflict Ackerman acknowledges he initially supported.Trump’s victory was also about an uneven economic recovery and, when it came to America’s wars, who did the fighting and dying. Overwhelmingly, it wasn’t the offspring of coastal elites. In 2016, there was a notable correlation between battlefield casualties and support for Trump.According to Douglas L Kriner of Boston University and Francis X Shen of the University of Minnesota, “Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan could very well have been winners for [Hillary] Clinton if their war casualties were lower.” Residents of red states are more than 20% more likely to join the military. Denizens of blue America punch way above their weight when it comes to going to college.Ackerman, a graduate of New York’s hyper-meritocratic Bronx High School of Science, bares his own class prejudices much in the way Clinton did at a notorious Wall Street fundraiser. Hillary dunked on the “Deplorables”. Ackerman goes after those he sees as socially undesirable.In his telling, Trump is “an amalgam of no less than four of the worst kinds of New Yorkers”. According to his taxonomy, those are “outer-borough whites”, wealth vampires, dignity-free media strivers and landlords.I Alone Can Fix It: Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker on their Trump bestsellerRead moreThis year, many of those “outer-borough whites” voted for a Black candidate, Eric Adams, in the Democratic mayoral primary. Adams, Brooklyn’s borough president, is a former police captain.The real estate industry is a critical part of the city economy. Strivers have been here since the Dutch came onshore. As for “wealth vampires” – come on, really?The city’s economy reels. Murder is way up. Law and order matters. Ackerman’s disdain is misdirected.Nationally, the security state is not going to just disappear. But not all is gloom and doom. In a break with Obama and Trump, the Biden White House has pledged to no longer go gunning for reporters over leaks.The US is leaving Afghanistan. Unlike Trump, Biden was not dissuaded. And last Wednesday, the Senate foreign relations committee voted to end the 1991 and 2002 authorizations of use of military force in Iraq. Even the leviathan can budge.TopicsBooksSeptember 11 2001Donald TrumpTrump administrationUS politicsRepublicansDemocratsreviewsReuse this content More