Category Archives: NSA

TheNSA and the FBI under the Obama administration infringed upon foundational civil liberties manytimes over several years, according to recently declassified documents reviewed by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

The memos which were originally obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) through Freedom of Information Act litigation detail the improprieties, specifically the massive, indiscriminate surveillance of peoples communications. They were first reported on by The Hill.

The NSA intercepted hundreds of thousands of peoples personal information, including email addresses and phone numbers, throughout then-President Barack Obamas tenure. It was ostensibly empowered by Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which allows federal intelligence agencies to collect data on foreigners without a warrant. Due to the broad powers enumerated in the law and the inherent makeup of surveillance, the electronic communications of law abiding Americans are often picked up as well. Operators of the surveillance are required to immediately destroy any information that isnot part of the intended target, but often fail to do so. They are also officiallyobligated to keep the scope of the interception to a fewpieces of data, not a haphazardamount, and to ensure that a person who is inappropriatelyswept up in a warrant isnt identified.

According to section 3(b)(5) of NSAs Section 702 minimization procedures, computer selection terms used for scanning, such as telephone numbers, key words or phrases, or other discriminators, will be limited to those selection terms reasonably likely to return foreign intelligence information,' reads a formerly top secret NSA quarterly FISA compliance report from March 2015.

NSA reported that on [redacted] 2014, an analyst conducted an overly broad search against data acquired from multiple authorities including Section 702. NSA advises that the analyst realized his error immediately, canceled the query, and deleted the corresponding results, the memo reads, adding that the analyst was once again reminded of the FISA requirements. This specific outlined incident wasjust one of many listedin just one of the many quarterly reports issued by the NSA, signifying the extent of violations.

Several consequential improper disclosures have occurred in recent months, including the unmasking of elected officials like former national security adviser Mike Flynn, subsequently causing morelawmakers to question its validity than before.(RELATED: Will The GOP Remake Surveillance Laws After Trump Leaks?)

Our countrys founders required the government to get a warrant before searching Americans private papers, ACLU Staff Attorney Patrick Toomey told TheDCNF. The same holds true for Americans phone calls, emails, and internet browsing today, whether a person is communicating with a friend around the corner or a family member around the world. The NSA should not be spying on us.

The agency claims that of course some incidental surveillance will occur, and errors only happenless than 1 percent of the time.

Quite simply, a compliance program that never finds an incident is not a robust compliance program, said Michael T. Halbig, the NSAs chief spokesman, according to The Hill. The National Security Agency has in place a strong compliance program that identifies incidents, reports them to external overseers, and then develops appropriate solutions to remedy any incidents.

Stewart Baker, the first assistant secretary for policy at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security under President George W. Bush, told TheDCNF that its difficultto authorize Section 702 without enablingthe collection of Americans communications. He provides a telling example of a hypotheticalemail address like [emailprotected] in whichit doesnt explicitly show if Mahmoud, who may be conversing with nefarious Yemeni nationals, is an American or not.

Baker asserts that if the NSA knew that Mahmoud was an American, it would usually mask' his email address with some label like USPerson No. 1 email address.

Section 702 is an effective program that cant really work if we try to exclude Americans communications, Baker continued, adding that the unmasking provisions could be tightened up and they were effectively loosened as part of the sharing imperative arising from 9/11.

OneNSA analyst, for example, conducted the same search query about a particular American every work day for months.

The NSA announced in April that it stopped the practice of scooping communications American citizens have with foreign surveillance targets. But it is not clear how it will do so if it continues implementing surveillance under Section 702 of FISA, which is set to expire at the end of the year.

The content of our emails and texts contains incredibly personal information about our work, our families, and our most intimate thoughts, Michelle Richardson of the Center for Democracy Technology, a nonprofit, said in a statement provided toTheDCNF. The NSA should never have been vacuuming up all of these communications, many of which involved Americans, without a warrant. While we welcome the voluntary stopping of this practice, its clear that Section 702 must be reformed so that the government cannot collect this information in the future.

Not everyone is interested in reforming the surveillance measure, though. Spearheaded by Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, a large group of Republican senators introduced legislation in Juneto indefinitely extend the statute for national security purposes.

Follow Eric on Twitter

Send tips to [emailprotected].

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [emailprotected].

See the rest here:
New Docs Show Obama-Era NSA Spied On Americans Without Warrants - The Daily Caller

Indias National Security Adviser Ajit Doval arrived in Beijing on Wednesday afternoon for a multilateral security meet but the focus will be on his bilateral interactions with the Chinese leadership against the backdrop of the military standoff near the Sikkim border.

Doval will meet President Xi Jinping with his counterparts from BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) countries on Friday. Security officials from BRICS states are meeting to discuss issues such as counter-terrorism and cyber-security in the run-up to the groupings summit to be held in Chinas Xiamen city in September.

But the focus will be on whether Dovals meetings with Chinese officials, including state councillor Yang Jiechi, will help to resolve or at least ease - the tensions in Donglang, where the standoff is now into its second month.

The BRICS-related meetings, including the meeting with Xi, are slated for Friday but Chinese and Indian officials here were tight-lipped about Dovals schedule.

Beijing on Wednesday repeated its precondition for any dialogue with India to resolve the standoff: New Delhi has to withdraw its troops from Donglang, which is under Beijings control but claimed by Thimphu.

Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi has blamed India for the face-off and importantly chose a foreign country, Thailand, to air his strong views on the situation. Wang told reporters in Bangkok this week the problem was very straightforward and even Indian officials publicly said that Chinese soldiers didnt enter the Indian territory.

This meant, he indicated, the Indian side admitted (crossing) into Chinese territory. The resolution of the problem is very simple, he said: Indian troops have to go out.

India has said it acted in coordination with Bhutan to block the construction of a road by Chinese troops at Donglang as it would alter the status quo and have serious implications for national security.

On Monday, Chinas foreign ministry spokesperson Lu Kang indicated Doval is likely to meet Yang in Beijing but ruled out a discussion on the Donglang standoff.

As far as we know, in previous meetings, usually it is arranged for the heads of delegations to hold (bilateral) meetings to exchange views on bilateral relations and other international issues, Lu had said.

He had added: The crux now is Indian border troops illegally stayed on Chinas territory. Once again, we urge India to pull back to the Indian side of the boundary. I want to stress that this is the precondition for any meaningful talks between the two sides.

Dovals visit is part of the build-up for the BRICS Summit to be held in Xiamen city in the first week of September, which will be attended by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

If the standoff between India and China isnt resolved by then, it will cast a shadow of uncertainty over the summit and might put a question mark on the idea of BRICS.

For now, the multilateral element of the BRICS security summit will be on display this week.

On Friday, the five heads of security delegations from the BRICS states will meet to discuss global governance, counter-terrorism, cyber security, energy security, international and regional hotspots, and national security and development.

Besides Doval and Yang, minister of state security David Mahlobo of South Africa, Minister Sergio Etchegoyen of the Office of Institutional Security of the Presidency of Brazil and Russias Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev will attend the meeting.

Read the original post:
NSA Ajit Doval in Beijing amid standoff as China demands Indian troop withdrawal - Hindustan Times

This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," July 25, 2017. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: This is a "Fox News Alert." And we are broadcasting from the swamp in Washington, D.C. And welcome to "Hannity."

A brand-new bombshell from The Hill's John Solomon reveals the depth of the Obama era NSA spying and civil liberties violations. John Solomon, along with Circa News's Sara Carter -- they will join us tonight on this explosive story.

Also, the president has just landed at Joint Base Andrews. And earlier tonight, he took his message directly to you, the American people. He had a rally in Youngstown, Ohio, where he pushed his agenda and took on his critics. And that is the subject of tonight's very important transitional "Opening Monologue."

All right, during tonight's massive rally in Ohio, President Trump issued an urgent call, pushing Congress to finally get rid of ObamaCare and to replace it with something that actually works for you, the American people. It's time for these guys in the swamp, in the sewer here in D.C. to get to work. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We're now one step closer to liberating our citizens from this ObamaCare nightmare!

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: And delivering great health care for the American people. We're going to do that, too. The Senate is working not only to repeal ObamaCare but to deliver great health care for the American people. Any senator who votes against repeal and replace is telling America that they are fine with the "Obama care" nightmare! And I predict they'll have a lot of problems.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: And I predict he's right. But repealing and replacing "Obama care" is not the only urgent task on the president's agenda. Now, listen to the president earlier tonight reassuring the American people that building the wall on our southern border is not just an empty campaign promise. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: After spending billion dollars defending other nations' borders, we are finally defending our borders!

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: Don't even think about it. We will build the wall.

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: Don't even think about it.

I watch the media as they say, Well, he just had some fun during the campaign on the wall. That wasn't fun, folks! We're building that wall. And walls do work. And we're going to have great people come into our country, but we're not going to put ourselves through the problems that we've had for so many years!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Is Congress listening? Now, the president also promised to drive out violent cartel-linked gangs and to put an end finally to sanctuary cities once and for all. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: The predators and criminal aliens who poison our communities with drugs and prey on innocent young people, these beautiful, beautiful innocent young people, will find no safe haven anywhere in our country. And that is why my administration is launching a nationwide crackdown on sanctuary cities!

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: American cities should be sanctuaries for law-abiding Americans, for people that look up to the law, for people that respect the law, not for criminals and gang members that we want the hell out of our country!

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Now, the president also spoke about lowering taxes in tonight's speech. Please lower taxes. Please stop burdening us! Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: My administration is working every single day to heed and honor the will of the voters. That includes working on one of the biggest tax cuts in American history. And actually, if I get what I want, it will be the single biggest tax cut in American history!

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: We have the highest taxes anywhere in the world, and this will really bring them down to one of the lowest. And we really have no choice. We will have growth. We will have everything that we've dreamed of having. It's time to let Americans keep more of their own money. It's time to bring new companies to our shores and to create a new era of growth, prosperity and wealth!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: What a great idea. Let's get Americans back to work, back in the labor force, and of course, out of poverty and off of food stamps. Republicans, what do you stand for?

Now, the president's rally didn't just include plans for the future. He also touted a long list of accomplishments. Now, despite what the left- wing mainstream establishment media is reporting -- well, the president -- he has been very busy the last six months, working on trying to push through his bold agenda despite pretty much zero help from any Democrats, and frankly, weak Republicans.

And here's the president talking about what he has accomplished so far these last six months.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Our 2nd Amendment is very, very sound again. That would have been gonzo. It would have been gone.

We've eliminated burdensome regulations at record speed, and many, many more are coming off. And boy, have we put those coal miners and coal back on the map. You've seen that, huh?

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: We've achieved a historic increase in defense spending to get our troops the support they so richly deserve. We have signed new legislation to hold federal workers accountable for the care they provide to our great, great veterans!

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: To protect American jobs and workers, I withdrew the United States from both the Trans-Pacific Partnership potential disaster...

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: ... and the job-killing Paris climate accord. Believe me.

Unemployment last month hit a 16-year low. Since my election, we've added much more than one million jobs!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Believe it or not, you're never going to hear that in mainstream media. And what you just heard is only a fraction of what the president has actually accomplished.

Also tonight, in true Trump fashion, the president fought back against his critics, the best part of the speech. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Sometimes they say, He doesn't act presidential.

(BOOS)

TRUMP: And I say, Hey, look, great schools, smart guy. It's so easy to act presidential, but that's not going to get it done. In fact, I said it's much easier, by the way, to act presidential than what we're doing here tonight! Believe me. And I said...

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: And I said, with the exception of the late, great Abraham Lincoln, I can be more presidential than any president that's ever held this office! That I can tell you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Do we really want a president who just acts? Now, tonight, the president sent a very important message that will reverberate across America and into the swamp and sewer that is Washington, D.C., where I am tonight.

And the president's not going to sit idly by and watch Congress fumble his agenda. He's going to take his message again and again directly to you, the American people. It's time to put pressure on lawmakers to finally do their job and get something done.

Here with reaction, author of the book "Putin's Gambit," Fox Business host, our sister network, Lou Dobbs is with us.

You know, every time the president goes directly to the American people, you see the reaction. There is not one iota's difference before the campaign. And every agenda item he has, which helped a lot of these senators and congressmen get elected, is supported by those crowds. What is Washington not getting? What are Republicans not getting?

LOU DOBBS, FOX BUSINESS: Just about everything, as you know, Sean. The president today was -- you know, as you say, this rally today was just like every rally that he carried out as a candidate for president. The love in the room for the president was palpable.

He is watching -- he doesn't need any extra energy, but he's drawing great energy from these people who are his supporters. They are also the people for whom he is working, not K Street, the lobbyists, the billion-dollar donors that expect to have the federal government heel and certainly the leadership of the Republican Party. They're so accustomed to them heeling to their every order and beck and call.

He is frustrating the establishment. That's what we're watching, is a conflict between this president, the status quo, and frankly, the defenders of the status quo, whether they're Republicans or Democrats. And he is winning, winning and winning. And the people in that room in Youngstown, Ohio, all 7,000 of them, know that very well, as do tens of millions of other Americans.

HANNITY: But Lou, if the Republicans don't do their part -- this is a seven-year promise to replace, replace "Obama care." They needed Mike Pence for the motion to proceed today...

DOBBS: Right.

HANNITY: ... which doesn't give me a whole lot of confidence that they're going to get this whole thing done or done in a way that they had promised for seven years. And think I think you got an economic plan so we can get Americans...

DOBBS: Right.

HANNITY: ... out of poverty, off of food stamps...

DOBBS: No, you're right.

HANNITY: ... back to work and get the border built and funded. And I don't think Congress realizes they will pay the price if they don't get the job done.

DOBBS: That is the sub-text here. You're exactly right again, Sean. This is -- this threat that is looming is for every one of those congressmen who are hesitant and hesitating to support this president and his agenda, and particularly the leadership, the speaker and the majority leader of the Senate, Ryan and Mitch McConnell. They had better deliver this time because it will be fundamentally a question of the survival of the Republican Party.

Donald Trump is -- what he was saying in Youngstown, Ohio, in my opinion, in addition to everything else that was so terrific about the economy, about turning this country around, he's serving notice that those are Trump Democrats in Youngstown, Ohio, which he lost by 3 points. But four years earlier, Barack Obama won that county by 27 points!

These are his people. And you heard Gino (ph), the man he brought up on the stage, and the chants for Gino from the crowd because he was talking about how much this president is loved by the forgotten man and woman. And all of those people in Youngstown represent much of the bread basket, where they've lost a third of the population of Youngstown, Ohio, their factories once one of the top steel producing cities in the country. And it's -- it's remarkable the notice that he served. And I guarantee you -- I don't know whether McConnell and Ryan got it, but I can guarantee you Schumer and Pelosi get it, and they're worried to death.

HANNITY: Yes. And by the way, a better way...

DOBBS: Oh, yes.

HANNITY: They -- there's no way for them, and especially after eight years of failure. Lou Dobbs, I know you stayed late for us tonight. As always, thanks you for being with us.

DOBBS: Great to be with you, Sean. Thanks.

HANNITY: And here now with more reaction to the president's rally in Youngstown, Ohio, we have Fox News contributor Herman Cain. One of the things -- I noticed that Chuck Grassley in the Senate is saying, Wait a minute. If outside interference from a foreign country is a big deal -- Russia, Russia, Russia -- OK, we've got evidence of collusion with Ukraine and influence in the election, as well. Also, we have the Uranium One deal. And then I look at House conservatives. They're pushing for a probe of Comey and Clinton and I know others are talking about Loretta Lynch.

The part of me is torn, Herman Cain, Mr. 999, positive ideas -- it's torn because it's not fair what we've been seeing, but the agenda the president talked about, repeal, replace and schools and borders and listing his accomplishments and Gorsuch -- at the end of the day, I suspect if he succeeds, that will push Republicans over the top in 2018 and 2020. I'm torn what to do.

HERMAN CAIN, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: But many of them don't realize that. Sean, that speech in Ohio reminded me of the three rallies I attended in Georgia, where I helped to introduce this president. He is re-asserting results, results, results. That's why he got the reaction from the crowd that he got. The Democrats are all about resist, resist, resist, and it's not resonating with people.

Hip, hip, hooray that he's taking his message directly to the people because the mainstream media's not going to do it. So he's doing it himself. And I think that helps to re-energize those people that voted for him because of exactly the things he is able to do, even despite the pushback by RINOs, Republicans in name only, and Democrats.

HANNITY: We learned that in spite of, what, 60 to 68 votes, repeal and replace -- Herman, we're on the radio. We were telling our audience those are showboats because if they really wanted to repeal and replace in those votes, they would have used the constitutional authority and the power of the purse, and they never did it. And the one guy that tried to use it, Ted Cruz, was excoriated by the Republican Party. So we knew they were showboats.

But on repeal and replace now, we learned 100 House Republicans had no intention of keeping that promise. And now you see the Senate just for the motion to proceed needing Mike Pence. This does not bode well, in my mind.

CAIN: You're right, Sean. Here's the deal. They thought that the American people were going to have very short memories. That's what they still think. What this president is doing is reminding the American people of what these Republicans promised.

And I got to tell you, last night on your show, you challenged your viewers to do exactly what I challenge my listeners to do, send e-mails, make phone calls and let them know that you are paying attention. That's the only thing that gets their attention. That's what gets results.

And with the president giving the kind of patriotic, pressable (ph) results-oriented speech that he's given today, it reminds people that, Yes, if I send that e-mail, if I make that phone call to my representative or to my senators, it will make a difference. I think this is great for the direction that this president is trying to go.

HANNITY: All right, Herman Cain, always good to see you. We appreciate it.

All right, we got...

CAIN: Thank you.

HANNITY: ... a busy breaking news night tonight here. "Hannity" in D.C. In a mini monologue, we will lay out the scandals Congress and the DOJ should be investigating and we'll get reaction, Monica Crowley, Geraldo Rivera.

And also tonight...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I'm here this evening to cut through the fake news filter and to speak straight to the American people!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: President Trump calling out the fake news media at tonight's rally in Ohio. Mercedes Schlapp, Lanny Davis, Larry Elder will join us with reaction.

And tonight, a "Hannity" investigation. An explosive new report by The Hill's John Solomon. It is about the Obama administration's NSA spying and civil liberties violations you need to know about. John Solomon, Sara Carter join us as we continue from the sewer and the swamp that is Washington, D.C.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Your future is what I'm fighting for each and every day. Here is just a small sample what have we accomplished in just our first six months in office. And I'll say this, and you know, they always like to say, Well, I don't know. But I think that with few exceptions, no president has done anywhere near what we've done in his first six months.

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: Not even close.

See the article here:
Cain: President Trump is reasserting results; Declassified memos reveal Obama admin. NSA privacy violations - Fox News

The National Security Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation violated specific civil liberty protections during the Obama years by improperly searching and disseminating raw intelligence on Americans or failing to promptly delete unauthorized intercepts, according to newly declassified memos that provide some of the richest detail to date on the spy agencies ability to obey their own rules.

The memos reviewed by The Hill were publicly released on July 11 through Freedom of Information Act litigation by the American Civil Liberties Union.

The NSA says that the missteps amount to a small number less than 1 percent when compared to the hundreds of thousands of specific phone numbers and email addresses the agencies intercepted through theso-called Section 702 warrantless spying program created by Congress in late 2008.

Quite simply, a compliance program that never finds an incident is not a robust compliance program, said Michael T. Halbig, theNSAs chief spokesman. The National Security Agency has in place a strong compliance program that identifies incidents, reports them to external overseers, and then develops appropriate solutions to remedy any incidents.

But critics say the memos undercut the intelligence communitys claim that it has robust protections for Americans incidentally intercepted under the program.

Americans should be alarmed that theNSAisvacuuming up their emails and phone calls without a warrant, said Patrick ToomeyPat ToomeyNewly declassified memos detail extent of improper Obama-era NSA spying Overnight Tech: FCC won't fine Colbert over Trump joke | Trump budget slashes science funding | Net neutrality comment period opens Appeals court decision keeps lawsuit against NSA surveillance alive MORE, an ACLU staff attorney in New York who helped pursue the FOIA litigation.TheNSAclaims it has rules to protectour privacy, but it turns out those rules are weak, full of loopholes, andviolated again and again.

Section 702 empowers the NSA to spy on foreign powers and to retain and use certain intercepted data that was incidentally collected on Americans under strict privacy protections. Wrongly collected information is supposed to be immediately destroyed.

The Hill reviewed the new ACLU documents as well as compliance memos released by the NSA inspector general and identified more than 90 incidents where violations specifically cited an impact on Americans. Many incidents involved multiple persons, multiple violations or extended periods of time.

For instance, thegovernment admitted improperly searchingNSAs foreign intercept data on multiple occasions, including one instance in which ananalyst ran the same search query about an American every work day for a period between 2013 and 2014.

There also were several instances in which Americans unmasked names were improperly shared inside the intelligence community without being redacted, a violation of the so-called minimization procedures that President Obama loosened in 2011that are supposed to protect an Americans' identity from disclosure when they are intercepted without a warrant.Numerous times improperly unmasked information about Americans had to be recalled and purged after the fact, the memos stated.

CIA and FBI received unminimized data from many Section 702-tasked facilities and at times are thus required to conduct similar purges, one report noted.

NSAissued a report which included the name of a United States person whose identity was not foreign intelligence, said one typical incident report from 2015, which said theNSAeventually discovered the error and recalled the information.

Likewise, the FBI disclosed three instances between December 2013 and February 2014 of improper disseminations of U.S. persons identities.

TheNSAalso admitted it was slow in some cases to notify fellow intelligence agencies when it wrongly disseminated information about Americans. The law requires a notificationwithin five days, but some took as long as 131 business days and the average was 19 days., the memos show

U.S. intelligence officials directly familiar with the violations told The Hill that the memos confirm that the intelligence agencies have routinely policed, fixed and self-disclosed to the nation's intelligence court thousands of minor procedural and more serious privacy infractions that have impacted both Americans and foreigners alike since the so-called Section 702 warrantless spying program was created by Congress in late 2008.

Alexander W. Joel, who leads the Office of Civil Liberties, Privacy and Transparency under the Director of National Intelligence, said the documents chronicle episodes that have been reported to Congress and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) for years in real time and are a tribute to the multiple layers of oversight inside the intelligence community.

We take every compliance incident very seriously and continually strive to improve compliance through our oversight regime and as evidence by our reporting requirements to the FISC and Congress, he told The Hill. That said, we believe that, particularly when compared with the overall level of activity, the compliance incident rate is very low.

The FBI told the Hill that the Section 702 law is "One of the most valuable tools the Intelligence Community has, and therefore, is used with the utmost care by the men and women of the FBI so as to notjeopardize future utility. As such, we continuallyevaluate our internal policies and procedures to further reduce the number of these compliance matters."

The new documents show that theNSAhas, on occasion, exempted itself from its legal obligation to destroy all domestic communications that were improperly intercepted.

Under the law, theNSAis supposed to destroy any intercept if it determines the data was domestically gathered, meaning someone was intercepted on U.S. soil without a warrant when the agency thought they were still overseas. The NSA however, has said previously it created destruction waivers to keep such intercepts in certain cases.

The new documents confirm theNSAhas in fact issued such waivers and that it uncovered in 2012 a significant violation in which the waivers were improperly used and the infraction was slow to be reported to the court.

In light of related filings being presented to the Court at the same time this incident was discovered and the significance of the incident, DOJ should have reported this incident under the our immediate notification process, then-Assistant Attorney General Lisa Monaco wrote the FISA court in August 28, 2012 about the episode, ???according to one memo released through the FOIA.????

TheNSAdeclined to say how often destruction waivers are given. But ODNIs Joel said the FISC court has supervised such waivers and affirmed they are consistent with the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution and the statutory requirements of Section 702.

Other violations cited in the memos:

In annual and quarterly compliance reports that have been released in recent years, U.S. intelligence agencies have estimated the number of Section 702 violations has averaged between 0.3 percent and 0.6 percent of the total number of taskings. A tasking is an intelligence term that reflects a request to intercept a specific phone number or email address.

The NSA now targets more than 100,000 individuals a year under Section 702 for foreign spying, and some individual targets get multiple taskings, officials said.

The actual number of compliance incidents remains classified but from the publicly available data it is irrefutable that the number is in the thousands since Section 702 was fully implemented by 2009, said a senior U.S. official with direct knowledge, who spoke only on condition of anonymity.

The increasing transparency on Section 702 violations is having an impact on both critics and supporters of a law that is up for renewal in Congress at the end of this year. Of concern are the instances in which Americans data is incidentally collected and then misused.

Retired House Intelligence Committee chairman Pete Hoekstra, a Republican who strongly supported the NSA warrantless spying program when it started under George W. Bush, said he now fears it has now become too big and intrusive.

If I were still in Congress today, I might vote with the people today to shut the program down or curtail it, Hoekstrak, who has been tapped by Trump to be ambassador to the Netherlands, said in an interview.

One percent or less sounds great, but the truth is one percent of my credit card charges dont come back wrong every month. And in my mind one percent is pretty sloppy when it can impact Americans privacy.

Continued here:
Newly declassified memos detail extent of improper Obama-era NSA spying - The Hill

In light of Michael Sulmeyers excellent recent piece on splitting NSA and CYBERCOM, which ran at War on the Rocks last week, I want to pull together some of the key legal and policy developments of the past year in a single narrative. My aim is to put them in context with each other in a way that will provide useful background for those new to this issue, while also putting a spotlight on the deconfliction-of-equities issue that the split proposal raises. My apologies that this is a longer-than-normal post (I did not have time to be shorter!).

1. July 2016 Reports of DOD frustration over pace of anti-ISIS cyber operations

In July 2016, the Washington Post (Ellen Nakashima & Missy Ryan) reported on CYBERCOMs efforts to disrupt the Islamic States online activities (internal communications, external propaganda, financing, etc.), emphasizing the view of DOD leadership that CYBERCOM was underperforming:

An unprecedented Pentagon cyber-offensive against the Islamic State has gotten off to a slow start, officials said, frustrating Pentagon leaders and threatening to undermine efforts to counter the militant groups sophisticated use of technology for recruiting, operations and propaganda.

But defense officials said the command is still working to put the right staff in place and has not yet developed a full suite of malware and other tools tailored to attack an adversary dramatically different from the nation-states Cybercom was created to fight.

Although officials declined to detail current operations, they said that cyberattacks occurring under the new task force might, for instance, disrupt a payment system, identify a communications platform used by Islamic State members and knock it out, or bring down Dabiq, the Islamic States online magazine.

The report is an excellent snapshot of several distinct challenges the military use of computer network operations can pose.

One such challenge is operational capacity. The story suggests that CYBERCOM simply did not have the right personnel and the right exploits on hand for this particular mission, at least at the start. Thats a problem that can be fixed, and the report details the steps DOD began taking in 2016 to do just that.

Another challenge is the need to have an effective process for deconfliction between intelligence-collection and operational-effect equities. As the article summarized the issue:

Whenever the military undertakes a cyber-operation to disrupt a network, the intelligence community may risk losing an opportunity to monitor communications on that network. So military cybersecurity officials have worked to better coordinate their target selection and operations with intelligence officials.

This is not a novel tension, in the abstract. For as long as there has been signals intelligence, there have been tensions of this kind. When one side has access to the others communications, there will always be tension between the temptation to exploit that access for operational effect (with the opportunity cost of risking loss of that access going forward as the enemy realizes it has been monitored) and the temptation to instead exploit it for indirect intelligence advantage (with the opportunity cost of forgoing direct operational advantage in at least some cases). World War II provides famous examples. And so one might fairly ask: is there anything really different about computer network operations, warranting special attention to the topic in this setting?

Perhaps. In this domain there is much more overlap between the means of collection and the means of carrying out a disruptive operations. Indeed, those means often will be the exact same: a particular exploit providing access to an enemy device, network, etc. It seems to me that this ensures that the tension between collection and operational equities will arise with greater frequency, and less room for workarounds, than in more familiar settings.

Having mentioned both the operational capacity concern and the competing-equities concern, now is a good time to emphasize the significance of the status-quo for NSA and CYBERCOM: the dual-hatted commander. Whereas more familiar, traditional scenarios involving tension between collection and operational equities usually involve distinct underlying institutions and commanders, the status quo with respect to computer network operations has always (well, the past seven years) involved the dual-hatting of NSAs director and CYBERCOMs commander.

This model in theory ensures that neither institution has a home-field advantage, and maximizes the chance that the key decisionmaker (yes, there can be important decisions both below and above the dual-hat, but the dual-hat is obviously in the key position) fully buys into and fully grasps the importance of each institutions mission.

Of course, it is possible that the dual-hat might tilt one direction to an unfair or undesirable degree. And it is possible that some might perceive such a tilt even when there isnt one. As 2016 wore on, questions of this kind began to appear in public, and by September the media was reporting that DNI Clapper and SecDef Carter both were in favor of splitting up the dual-hat. It was not the first time this topic had come up, to be sure; President Obama had considered ordering a split in 2013 (during the aftermath of the Snowden controversy), but had not taken that step at least in part out of concern about CYBERCOMs independent operational capacity. Now the idea appeared to have momentum.

A report from Ellen Nakashima in the Washington Post that same month suggested that this momentum was in part a product of CYBERCOMs operational maturation, but also in significant part driven by the perception that Admiral Rogers, the current dual-hat, favored collection equities to an undue extent:

Whether or not its true, the perception with Secretary Carter and [top aides] has become that the intelligence agency has been winning out at the expense of [cyber] war efforts, said one senior military official.

(See also this report by the New York Times, stating that frustration along these same lines contributed to the effort to get President Obama to remove Admiral Rogers in late 2016.)

The Washington Post report also highlighted concerns that splitting NSA and CYBERCOM at the leadership level might actually weaken rather than empower CYBERCOM, as NSA inevitably would become free to withhold from CYBERCOM at least some exploits or other forms of access so that sources would not be lost:

Cyber Commands mission, their primary focus, is to degrade or destroy, the former official said. NSAs is exploit [to gather intelligence] only. So without having one person as the leader for both, the bureaucratic walls will go up and youll find NSA not cooperating with Cyber Command to give them the information theyll need to be successful.

2. December 2016 Congress puts on the brakes

Against this backdrop, Congress intervened in late 2016 to slow down the Obama administrations move to split the dual-hat. Section 1642 of the NDAA FY17, enacted in late December, provides that NSA and CYBERCOM must continue to share a dual-hatted director/commander unless and until the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff jointly certify to certain Congressional committees (SASC & HASC; SSCI & HPSCI; and the Appropriations Committees) that separation will not pose unacceptable risks to CYBERCOMs effectiveness, and that the following six conditions are met:

(i) Robust operational infrastructure has been deployed that is sufficient to meet the unique cyber mission needs of the United States Cyber Command and the National Security Agency, respectively.

(ii) Robust command and control systems and processes have been established for planning, deconflicting, and executing military cyber operations.

(iii) The tools and weapons used in cyber operations are sufficient for achieving required effects.

(iv) Capabilities have been established to enable intelligence collection and operational preparation of the environment for cyber operations.

(v) Capabilities have been established to train cyber operations personnel, test cyber capabilities, and rehearse cyber missions.

(vi) The cyber mission force has achieved full operational capability.

Section 1642(b)(2)(C) (emphasis added). President Obamas signing statement criticized Congress for imposing this requirement, but did not include a claim that it was unconstitutional. It remains the law at this time.

3. Early 2017 Complications in the War Against the Islamic State

While lawmakers and policymakers wrestled with the pros and cons of splitting NSA and CYBERCOM, computer network operations against the Islamic State continued to accelerate.

Along the way, however, new problems emerged.

As Ellen Nakashima of the Washington Post reported in May 2017, CYBERCOM by late 2016 had encountered a new set of challenges in its enhanced effort to shut down ISIS sites and platforms: third-country effects.

A secret global operation by the Pentagon late last year to sabotage the Islamic States online videos and propaganda sparked fierce debate inside the government over whether it was necessary to notify countries that are home to computer hosting services used by the extremist group, including U.S. allies in Europe. Cybercom developed the campaign under pressure from then-Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter, who wanted the command to raise its game against the Islamic State. But when the CIA, State Department and FBI got wind of the plan to conduct operations inside the borders of other countries without telling them, officials at the agencies immediately became concerned that the campaign could undermine cooperation with those countries on law enforcement, intelligence and counterterrorism. The issue took the Obama National Security Council weeks to address

This article highlights a third significant challenge associated with computer network operations: attacking the enemys online presence often requires, or at least risks, some degree of impact on servers located in other countries. Third-country impact involves both legal and policy challenges, and as the quote above illustrates it also brings into play otherwise-unrelated equities of other agencies. Thus, the competing-equities tension is not just a clash between collection and operational equities, but in some cases many others as well. The dual-hat command structure is primarily an answer only to the former, not the latter.

Meanwhile, a sobering reality about the utility of cyberattacks on Islamic State communications began to become clear: the effects often did not last. This was the thrust of an important piece by David Sanger and Eric Schmitt in the New York Times in June 2017:

[S]ince they began training their arsenal of cyberweapons on internet use by the Islamic State, the results have been a consistent disappointment, American officials say. [It] has become clear that recruitment efforts and communications hubs reappear almost as quickly as they are torn down. In general, there was some sense of disappointment in the overall ability for cyberoperations to land a major blow against ISIS," or the Islamic State, said Joshua Geltzer, who was the senior director for counterterrorism at the National Security Council until March. "This is just much harder in practice than people think..."

This suggested that the military equities that some felt had been undervalued by Admiral Rogers in the past were less weighty than proponents had assumed. Nonetheless, momentum towards separationand concern that the dual-hat unduly favors collection equitiescontinues.

In mid-July, reports emerged that the Pentagon had submitted to the Trump administration a plan for effectuating the split, with some of the accompanying commentary continuing to advance the argument that NSA holds CYBERCOM back to an improper extent:

The goal, [unnamed U.S. officials] said, is to give U.S. Cyber Command more autonomy, freeing it from any constraints that stem from working alongside the NSA, which is responsible for monitoring and collecting telephone, internet and other intelligence data from around the world a responsibility that can sometimes clash with military operations against enemy forces.

Meanwhile, however, Congress is in the midst of producing the next NDAA, and it may impose a further hurdleone that wont prevent the split, but may well slow it down considerably.

4. Congress reengages

In mid-July, the House passed H.R. 2810, which includes a section addressing the potential NSA/CYBERCOM split. Section 1655 requires the SecDef to provide SASC, HASC, SSCI, and HPSCI with a report on DODs progress in addressing the issues that must be certified to Congress before NSA and CYBERCOM may be split (under the terms of section 1642 of NDAA FY17). That report must address:

(1) Metrics and milestones for meeting the conditions described in subsection (b)(2)(C) of such section 1642.

(2) Identification of any challenges to meeting such conditions.

(3) Identification of entities or persons requiring additional resources as a result of any decision to terminate the dual-hat arrangement.

(4) Identification of any updates to statutory authorities needed as a result of any decision to terminate the dual-hat arrangement.

Meanwhile, the Senates NDAAFY18 draft (S.1519) has begun its trek through that chamber, and it includes a requirement (section 1627) that the commander of CYBERCOM report to SASC and HASC on the costs associated with meeting the conditions needed to enable NSA and CYBERCOM to split. As the SASC Committee Report accompanying the bill explains:

The committee believes any decision to separate Cyber Command and the National Security Agency should be conditions-based. The committee also believes that the funding associated with separating the dual-hat arrangement will be a multiyear sustained effort. The committee notes that the fiscal year 2018 budget request failed to include the funding necessary to resource the separation of the dual-hat arrangement. The committee looks to Cyber Command to estimate the funding required to meet the conditions identified in section 1642(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114328) and intends to closely monitor future budget submissions and the cost, schedule, and performance of key cyber programs to ensure that Cyber Command is appropriately resourced prior to any decision to end the dual-hat arrangement.

5. What is the bottom line in light of all this?

* The statutory obstacles to a split of the dual-hat, from the current NDAA, are not onerous. The certifications required by section 1642 of NDAA FY17 can be dealt with easily enough given the high level of generality with which they are framed, once the political will is there to carry out the separation. It sounds as if the will is there, and that the only real hurdle is specifying something realistic in terms of the requirement that the cyber mission force reach full operational capacity.

* Deconfliction and Competing-Equities Tensions remain a significant issue that needs to be addressed very carefully. Yes, section 1642 of NDAA FY17 requires a certification on deconfliction, but as just noted the requirement is framed at a high-level of generality. People need to focus on the fact that a main driver of the effort to split NSA and CYBERCOM has been the perception that Admiral Rogers gives collection equities too much weightbut that he may well have been quite right to do so. And people also need to focus on the converse risk: that NSA might pull back on cooperation with CYBERCOM to an undesirable degree, post-split, in order to preserve the means of its collection. All of this can be managed, and its not obvious that the current dual-hat solution is the only way to do it. But there needs to be a credible process of some kind, if not the dual-hat. Its not clear that the certification requirement under section 1642 actually will compel sufficient consideration of this issue.

* Section 1627 of NDAA FY18, if it is enacted as SASC has proposed, will be a more serious hurdle. Budgets matter, and it is likely that the correct answer to the budget question posed by that section will involve a substantial need. That money then needs to be found and appropriated. Probably it should be and no doubt it will be. But it will take time for all this to grind out. Possibly this delay would track the time needed in any event to produce a credible claim that the cyber mission force has reached full operational capacity.

Read the rest here:
Should NSA and CYBERCOM Split? The Legal and Policy Hurdles as They Developed Over the Past Year - Lawfare (blog)

The National Security Agencys mass surveillance has greatly expanded in the years since September 11, 2001. Disclosures have shown that, until recently, the government regularly tracked the calls of hundreds of millions of Americans. Today, it continues to spy on a vast but unknown number of Americans international calls, text messages, web-browsing activities, and emails.

The governments surveillance programs have infiltrated most of the communications technologies we have come to rely on. They are largely enabled by a problematic law passed by Congress the FISA Amendments Act (FAA), which is set to expire this year along with Executive Order 12,333, the primary authority invoked by the NSA to conduct surveillance outside of the United States. The Patriot Act has also made it easier for the government to spy on Americans right here at home over the past 15 years. Although the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court oversees some of the governments surveillance activities, it operates in near-total secrecy through one-sided procedures that heavily favor the government.

Our Constitution and democratic system demand that government be transparent and accountable to the people, not the other way around. History has shown that powerful, secret surveillance tools will almost certainly be abused for political ends.

The ACLU has been at the forefront of the struggle to rein in the surveillance superstructure, which strikes at the core of our rights to privacy, free speech, and association.

The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 (FAA) gives the NSA almost unchecked power to monitor Americans international phone calls, text messages, and emails under the guise of targeting foreigners abroad. The ACLU has long warned that one provision of the statute, Section 702, would be used to eavesdrop on Americans private communications. In June 2013, The Guardian published documents provided by whistleblower Edward Snowden confirming the massive scale of this international dragnet. Recent disclosures also show that an unknown number of purely domestic communications are monitored, that the rules that supposedly protect Americans' privacy are weak and riddled with exceptions, and that virtually every email that goes into or out of the United States is scanned for suspicious keywords.

In 2008, less than an hour after President Bush signed the FAA into law, the ACLU filed a lawsuit challenging its constitutionality. The case, Amnesty v. Clapper, was filed on behalf of a broad coalition of attorneys and organizations whose work requires them to engage in sensitive and sometimes privileged telephone and email communications with individuals located abroad. But in a 54 ruling handed down in February 2013, the Supreme Court held that the ACLU plaintiffs did not have standing to sue because they could not prove their communications had actually been surveilled under the law.

In March 2015, the ACLU filed Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA, a lawsuit challenging Upstream surveillance under the FAA. Through Upstream surveillance, the U.S. government copies and searches the contents of almost all international and many domestic text-based internet communications. The suit was brought on behalf of nine educational, legal, human rights, and media organizations, including the Wikimedia Foundation, operator of one of the most-visited websites on the internet. Collectively, the plaintiffs engage in more than a trillion sensitive internet communications every year, and each has been profoundly harmed by NSA surveillance.

Executive Order 12,333, signed by President Reagan in 1981 and modified many times since, is the authority primarily relied upon by the intelligence agencies to gather foreign intelligence outside of the United States. Recent disclosures indicate that the U.S. government operates a host of large-scale programs under EO 12333, many of which appear to involve the collection of vast quantities of Americans information. These programs have included, for example, the NSAs collection of billions of cellphone location records each day; its recording of every single cellphone call into, out of, and within at least two countries; and its surreptitious interception of data from Google and Yahoo user accounts as that information travels between those companies data centers located abroad.

In December 2013, the ACLU, along with the Media Freedom Information Access Clinic at Yale Law School, filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit demanding that the government release information about its use of EO 12,333 to conduct surveillance of Americans communications.

For many years, the government claimed sweeping authority under the Patriot Act to collect a record of every single phone call made by every single American "on an ongoing daily basis." This program not only exceeded the authority given to the government by Congress, but it violated the right of privacy protected by the Fourth Amendment, and the rights of free speech and association protected by the First Amendment. For this reason, the ACLU challenged the government's collection of our phone records under Section 215 of the Patriot Act just days after the program was revealed in June 2013 by The Guardian. In May 2015, a court of appeals found that the phone records program violated Section 215, and Congress allowed the provision to expire in June of that year. The program was reformed by the USA Freedom Act, which passed days later.

To bring greater transparency to the NSA's surveillance under the Patriot Act, the ACLU filed two motions with the secretive FISC asking it to release to the public its opinions authorizing the bulk collection of Americans' data by the NSA.

Our earlier work to reform the Patriot Act includes a number of successful challenges to the government's use of and secrecy surrounding National Security Letters.

The ACLU has long fought to bring greater transparency and public access to the FISC the secretive court that oversees the governments surveillance programs. When the FISC was first established in 1978, it primarily assessed individual surveillance applications to determine whether there was probable cause to believe a specific surveillance target was an agent of a foreign power. In recent years, however, the FISCs responsibilities have changed dramatically, and the FISC today oversees sweeping surveillance programs and assesses their constitutionality all without any public participation or review.

The ACLU has been advocating and petitioning for access to the FISC for more than a decade, working with Congress and the executive branch, and appearing before the court itself to push for greater transparency. Days after the courts Section 215 order was published in the press in June 2013, we filed a motion seeking access to the secret judicial opinions underlying the NSA's mass call tracking program. We have since filed two other access motions in the FISC, seeking significant legal opinions authorizing bulk collection and those interpreting the governments secret surveillance powers in the years after 9/11. We also signed a brief filed in the FISC in support of the First Amendment rights of the recipients of FISC orders, such as telephone and internet companies, to release information about the type and volume of national security requests they receive from the NSA and the FBI.

Secret law has no place in a democracy. Under the First Amendment, the public has a qualified right of access to FISC opinions concerning the scope, meaning, or constitutionality of the surveillance laws, and that right clearly applies to legal opinions interpreting Americans' bedrock constitutional rights. We all have a right to know, at least in general terms, what kinds of information the government is collecting about innocent Americans, on what scale, and based on what legal theory.

See the original post:
NSA Surveillance | American Civil Liberties Union

Two additional attorneys have joined Reality Leigh Winners defense team in the espionage prosecution in U.S. District Court in Augusta.

U.S. Magistrate Court Judge Brian K. Epps granted Joe Dally Whitley and Matthew Scott Chester permission to to be admitted to practice in the Southern District of Georgia to help defend Winner, 25.

Winner has pleaded not guilty to a single count of willful retention and transmission of national defense information. She is accused of copying a secret document while at work for National Security Agency contractor Pluribus at Fort Gordon and sending it anonymously to online news publication The Intercept. She has been held without bond since her arrest June 3.

Two days later, The Intercept published an in-depth article about a NSA analysis of Russias attempts to meddle in the presidential election, a subject now under scrutiny by the Senate and House intelligence committees and a special prosecutor investigating possible collusion between Russia and people supportive of Trumps campaign.

A tentative trial date for Winner is the week of Oct. 23.

The newest members of the defense team are both former federal prosecutors with the national law firm Baker Donelson.

Whitley of Atlanta served in the Department of Justice under Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush, serving as the acting associate attorney general, the number three position at the DOJ for a time. After 9/11, George W. Bush selected Whitley to serve as the first general counsel for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Whitley also previously served as the U.S. Attorney in the Northern District of Georgia. At Baker Donelson, Whitley specializes in complex civil and criminal cases, according to the firms website.

Chester works in the Baker Donelson office in New Orleans. He previously served as an assistant U.S. attorney in the New Orleans office where he prosecuted white collar crimes and public corruption cases.

In 2015, he was awarded the Department of Justices Superior Performance in Litigation award for his work on the prosecution team that helped convict New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin of charges that included bribery, wire fraud and tax evasion. Nagin is serving a 10-year prison term. Chester now also serves as an adjunct faculty member at Tulane University School of Law where he graduated cum laude in 2004.

Reach Sandy Hodson at (706) 823-3226 or sandy.hodson@augustachronicle.com.

Read the original:
Two new attorneys join accused NSA leaker's defense team | The ... - The Augusta Chronicle

A former top U.S. Justice Department official and a former federal prosecutor have joined Reality Winners legal defense team in the National Security Agency leak investigation.

Joe Whitley, who served as the acting associate U.S. attorney general during the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, is a partner with the Atlanta law firm of Baker Donelson. He also worked as the U.S. Department of Homeland Securitys general counsel and served as a federal prosecutor in Georgia. Joining Whitley is Matthew Chester, a former assistant U.S. attorney who works for the same law firm in New Orleans.

They are teaming up with John Bell and Titus Nichols of Bell & Brigham in Augusta. The attorneys joined the case after First Look Media, the parent company of The Intercept online news outlet, announced this month that it would help Winners legal defense. First Look said its Press Freedom Defense Fund would provide $50,000 in matching funds to Stand With Reality, a nonprofit campaign to support Winners case through advocacy and fundraising.

RELATED:Owner of The Intercept assisting accused NSA leakers legal defense

The U.S. Justice Department has accused Winner of leaking to The Intercept a top-secret NSA report about Russias meddling in the 2016 presidential election. The Intercept published the report, which says Russian military intelligence officials tried to hack into the U.S. voting system just before last Novembers election.

A federal grand jury has indicted Winner, 25, on a single count of "willful retention and transmission of national defense information. She faces up to 10 years in prison and $250,000 in fines. Winner, who is being held in the Lincoln County Jail, has pleaded not guilty to the charge.

Winners mother, Billie Winner-Davis, released a statement to Stand With Reality about the new attorneys joining her daughters defense team.

I am very excited about Mr. Whitley joining Realitys defense team, she said, as he appears to have extensive experience. His background with homeland security should be helpful.

Read more from the original source:
Former prosecutors join accused NSA leaker's legal defense team - MyAJC

BEIJING: Ahead of NSA Ajit Doval's visit, China's state media struck two different notes with the China Daily hopeful of a peaceful resolution to the deadlock with India while the Global Times said the "main schemer's" trip wouldn't sway Beijing.

In its editorial, 'It's never too late for India to mend its way', China Daily pressed for exploring ways to avoid confrontation.

The Global Times editorial, 'Doval visit won't sway China over border standoff', said Beijing would not talk until Indian troops were withdrawn.

Doval is to visit China for a meeting of NSAs from BRICS countries - Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - on July 27-28. He is expected to discuss the standoff with his Chinese counterpart Yang Jiechi.

Both officials are also the Special Representatives of their countries for the boundary talks.

The military standoff began on June 16 after the Chinese army tried to build a road near the Bhutan trijunction. India has protested the construction of the road, fearing it would allow China to cut India's access to its northeastern states.

"There are still hopes that the deadlock can be resolved peacefully, which serves both countries' best interests," the China Daily said. Doval's visit is "hoped" to "carry on that slight shift in India's previously bellicose stance", it said, referring to Foreign Secretary S Jaishankar's recent comments that both the countries should not let their "differences become disputes".

"The two sides need to explore ways to avoid confrontation. It would be damaging to both countries and regional stability if India cannot use its reason and wisdom to avoid the military collision both countries are currently on course for," it said.

But The Global Times, part of the Communist Party's publication group, said in its editorial that Beijing will not "talk" until Indian troops were withdrawn.

"As Doval is believed to be one of the main schemers behind the current border standoff between Chinese and Indian troops, the Indian media is pinning high hopes on the trip to settle the ongoing dispute," the daily said.

"New Delhi should give up its illusions, and Doval's Beijing visit is most certainly not an opportunity to settle the standoff in accordance with India's will," it said. It added that India should not take lightly yesterday's comments by the Chinese Defence ministry that New Delhi should not "harbour any illusions" and withdraw troops.

The two editorials come a day after the Chinese Foreign Ministry hinted that a bilateral meeting between Doval and Yang could happen on the sidelines of a BRICS NSAs' meet.

India has maintained that both the countries withdraw troops from the disputed area and resolve the issue through talks.

Continue reading here:
Chinese media now trains gun on NSA Ajit Doval, calls him 'main schemer' - Economic Times

Vermont Business Magazine The Vermont Department of Labor has partnered with NSA Industries, LLC in St. Johnsbury in an effort to fill the companys available positions with skilled, available talent. On Wednesday, July 26, 2017, NSA will open its doors from 4 pm 7 pm for an onsite recruitment event for the general public. NSAs facility is located at 210 Pierce Road, St Johnsbury.

Founded in 1982, NSA specializes in machining, sheet metal fabrication, engineering and logistics. The company currently employs over 200 individuals and is looking to hire machine operators, assemblers, testers/inspectors and welders, as well as a variety of other positions.

This event displays our desire to actively work with employers to assist them in finding the talent they need to be competitive in todays economy. Additionally, this job fair provides another opportunity for the displaced workers in the Northeast Kingdom to find meaningful employment, said Michael Harrington, Deputy Commissioner for the Vermont Department of Labor.

Wednesdays job fair is open to all interested individuals, and the Vermont Department of Labor will be onsite to provide support services, including application assistance.

For a complete list of jobs available at NSA or across the State, visit: http://www.nsaindustries.com or http://www.vermontjoblink.com.

Source: Vermont Department of Labor 7.24.2017

See the rest here:
Labor Dept partners with NSA in St Johnsbury to find workers - Vermont Biz