Mediaboss Marketing

An illustration from a government document. DIA/Public Domain

A versionof this storyoriginally appearedonMuckrock.comandGlomar Disclosure.

Last week, we looked at the early days of the CIAs foray into extrasensory espionage. Today well be following up with the veterans of the NSAs psychic wars, which they foresaw being waged well into the 90s and beyond.

The NSA document, dated from early 1981, calls for a number of steps to be taken, including identifying the potential for mind control.

Once the individuals had been identified, the Agency wanted to create cadres of talented synergized gifted people for special problem solving tests. However, the NSA was afraid that these people could be hard to control Consciousless [sic] or morbid people of talent must be strictly screened out of active programs because of the danger of severe mental illness and unscrupulous violation of security.

Beyond personnel available to the NSA, the Agency wanted to build a database of psychics around the world.

Additional NSA documents, produced by the government later in the year after MKULTRA had been shut down and all mind control programs had been disavowed, show the governments continued interest in researching mind control techniques, no matter how esoteric they seemed.

A number of predictions were made about the development of psychic warfare, including that subconscious mind control through telepathy would be possible by 1990. The report concluded grimly that there is no known countermeasure to prevent such applications.

At least one prediction came true - CREST documents show psychic trials still being performed as late as 1992.

The rest of the NSAs guidelines can be read here.

View post:
When the NSA Thought Mind Control Would Be an Actual Military Concern - Atlas Obscura

U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen and the former director of the NSA talked Wednesday in Linthicum about the importance of the government working with the private sector to improve the country's cyber security.

The discussion was hosted by Fort Meade Alliance, a non-profit that supports Fort Meade and its government agencies, such as the NSA. Figures in both the private and public sector attended the event. Alliance President Steve Tiller served as the moderator.

"When you start a fight, you want to know what the outcome will be," said retied Gen. Keith Alexander, who served as the NSA director from 2005-2014. "And when I look at our nation, we're not ready to defend ourselves in cyberspace. We have the best offensive team in the world, but we have the worst defense. We have the most infrastructure and the most risk."

Alexander served as the first commander of U.S. Cyber Command and is now CEO of IronNet Cybersecurity, a company that helps businesses with cyber security.

Van Hollen, a Democrat who was elected last fall to replace longtime U.S. Sen. Barbara Mikulski, said there are ways the federal government can encourage companies to share information in order to avoid hacks. It will most likely require congressional action, he said.

"Obviously we want to fight the poisonous stuff that ISIS puts out there, and how we do it most effectively is going to require a lot of thought," Van Hollen said. "I do believe that we just need to raise awareness that the threat is real from the bad guys. I stand ready to do my part with you to find out the best ways to incentivize these actions. We know we're being attack everyday."

Alexander suggested that the government create tax incentives for companies to create more regimented cyber security programs. If companies do this and share information, then the government could provide a form of liability protection, he said.

"We got to help people understand that we need to share cyber information, which is not personally identifiable," Alexander said. "We need to be an advocate and to explain."

An important part of working together, Alexander said, is making sure the public understands what the agency does. The NSA does "more to protect civil liberties than any other agency," he said.

The public needs to understand that the NSA isn't hacking their phone calls, Alexander added. The information they gather "saves lives," he said.

"I think at times we do sensationalize instead of inform," Alexander said. "Here's the question and this will come to head with the (Trump) administration: How do we get protection of our country, security of our nation and security and privacy of our civil liberties? We can and should do both."

Read this article:
Van Hollen, former NSA director discuss government, private sector collaboration - CapitalGazette.com

CHANDIGARH: As Jat leaders prepare their teams to seal the borders of Delhi, the Haryana government on Tuesday authorized the district magistrates (deputy commissioners) to invoke the National Security Act (NSA) in their areas.

According to provisions of NSA, the police can house arrest any person for 90 days. According to orders issued on Wednesday, the government has also equipped 381 officers in nine districts while designating them as special duty magistrates.

A maximum of 107 special duty magistrates have been appointed in Rohtak district while 77 officials have been designated in Jind, said additional chief secretary (home) Ram Niwas.

In an order issued on Tuesday, the government has empowered the officers to take their call on notifying NSA in their area.

NSA empowers the police to apprehend anyone posing threat to the law and order and that too without registering a case against him or her. The person can be detained for 90 days.

A senior officer in the intelligence wing of Haryana Police confirmed that the powers had been delegated after taking reports from the ground. The government has also authorized to ban websites and social networking sites alleged to be involving circulation of socially provocative material.

Read the original here:
Government authorizes DMs to invoke NSA - Times of India

We've become accustomed to the NSA's infamous Glomar responses. The agency is fond of telling FOIA requesters that it's not saying it has the sought-after documents on hand, but it's also not not saying that either. It's the public records Schrdinger's box, where requested documents lie in a dual state of existence and nonexistence, supposedly because any hint either way would rend the national security fabric in twain.

Brendan O'Connor of Gizmodo reports that a January 17th response to his FOIA request contains some new additions to the NSA's usual Glomar.

The notoriously secretive National Security Agency is raising security concerns to justify an apparent new policy of pre-emptively denying Freedom of Information Act requests about the agencys contractors.

The policy was cited by John R. Chapman, the agencys chief FOIA public liaison officer, in a letter to Gizmodo on January 17, 2017, three days before Donald Trumps inauguration. In explaining that the agency had declined to even conduct a search for records about a company called SCL Group, Chapman wrote, Please be advised that due to changing security concerns, this is now our standard response to all requests where we reasonably believe acquisition records are being sought on a contract or contract-related activity.

The NSA is building its own wall, apparently: one that will stand between FOIA requesters and documents related to government contractors in its employ. The NSA simply isn't going to respond to these requests. And if it's already decided it's not going to respond, then it's not going to be wasting time searching for records it has zero intention of producing.

But the non-response response to Gizmodo's FOIA request goes even further than a pre-emptive denial. It also contains language instructing empty-handed requesters not to jump to conclusions about the documents the NSA won't search for or release. From the FOIA non-response [PDF]:

The NSA/CSS FOIA office has not conducted any sort of search to determine whether or not records exist.

Obviously, if the NSA is unwilling to discuss the existence/nonexistence of documents it won't be searching for, it's not going to explain what sort of "changing security concerns" have prompted this new state of denial. Perhaps the agency feels there might be some reining in of transparency under the new administration. Or maybe the FOIA office has received new instructions on handling certain FOIA requests. If so, those instructions haven't been made public and, according to FOIA experts, this kind of denial is a first for No Such Agency.

This sounds like a non-Glomar Glomar response, Bradley Moss, deputy executive director for The James Madison Project, told Gizmodo, using a nickname for the notorious practice of national security and law enforcement agencies refusing to confirm or deny the existence of records. There are existing reasons to categorically deny a request, and even to refuse to conduct a search, Moss said, but hes never seen such a response justified in this way.

Theyre clamping down across the board, Moss said. There is clearly a determined and deliberate attempt to plug any gap that might allow the public to see how the national security apparatus actually works.

As Gizmodo points out, the NSA issued a 22-page guidebook to its FOIA office that addressed requests for contract info specifically. And nothing in it points to blanket denials and preemptive refusals to even search for records.

Gizmodo is seeking information about the SCL Group whose subsidiary, Cambridge Analytica, has had a hand in both the Trump presidential campaign and the UK's Brexit push. It could be that this attempted peek into SCL contracts raised red flags with the incoming administration. Those might be the "security concerns" hinted at in the NSA's response. If so, the blanket denial may be in place to prevent requesters from drawing conclusions about certain denied documents. If no one can have anything contract-related, then no one can draw inferences from their particular denial.

If this is the new status quo, then the departing administration is as much to blame as anyone. Obama talked a lot about government transparency, but year after year, his administration set new records in FOIA denials and deployed exemptions. This looks to be more of the same, only without the empty promises of greater accountability.

See the original post here:
NSA Cites New 'Security Concerns' In Preemptive Refusal To Even Search For Contractor Documents - Techdirt

January 31, 2017

Agency called for worldwide psychic registry, expected mind control as a practical military concern by the 90s

A version of this article appeared on Glomar Disclosure

Last week, we looked at the early days of the CIAs foray into extrasensory espionage. Today well be following up with the veterans of the NSAs psychic wars, which they foresaw being waged well into the 90s and beyond.

The NSA document, dated from early 1981, calls for a number of steps to be taken, including identifying the potential for mind control.

Once the individuals had been identified, the Agency wanted to create cadres of talented synergized gifted people for special problem solving tests. However, the NSA was afraid that these people could be hard to control Consciousless [sic] or morbid people of talent must be strictly screened out of active programs because of the danger of severe mental illness and unscrupulous violation of security.

Beyond personnel available to the NSA, the Agency wanted to build a database of psychics around the world.

Additional NSA documents, produced by the government later in the year after MKULTRA had been shut down and all mind control programs had been disavowed, show the governments continued interest in researching mind control techniques, no matter how esoteric they seemed.

A number of predictions were made about the development of psychic warfare, including that subconscious mind control through telepathy would be possible by 1990. The report concluded grimly that there is no known countermeasure to prevent such applications.

At least one prediction came true - CREST documents show psychic trials still being performed as late as 1992.

The NSAs guidelines are embedded below:

Like Mike Bests work? Support him on Patreon.

Image via National Security Agency

Read the original post:
Veterans of the NSA's psychic wars - MuckRock