Drones To Keep Watch Over Canadian Arctic?

This might be one way for Ottawa to justify purchasing a reduced number of F-35 stealth fighters.

The federal government [of Canada] is considering a proposal to buy at least three high-altitude, unmanned aerial vehicles in what could be an attempt to salvage its Arctic sovereignty ambitions.

The pitch was made by U.S. defence contractor Northrop Grumman Corp. and involves modifying its existing Global Hawk drone, which can operate at 20,000 metres, to meet the rigours of flying in the Far North.

Many of the Conservative government’s plans to establish a presence in the rapidly thawing region, including the construction of military icebreakers and the establishment of a deepwater port, are behind schedule.
The U.S. Air Force is considering selling some of its Global Hawks, which are still under construction, as part of military budget cuts.

“It’s a capability that matches a need here in Canada,” Dane Marolt, Northrop Grumman’s director of international business development. “The Arctic is an issue for Canada. It’s also an issue for the United States. Unless you know what’s going on there, you can’t take any action.”

He says any potential purchase would have to go through the Pentagon, but adds the proposal given to the Canadian government includes aircraft, ground stations, spares and in-service support.

By: Shelldrake

Intelligence Agencies: Keeping Us Safe

Here's the start of the article about the new underwear-bomb plot that was thwarted by the CIA.

The U.S. thwarted a bomb plot by al Qaeda's Yemeni branch aimed at bringing down a jetliner with a more advanced version of an underwear bomb used in a failed 2009 Christmas Day attempt, officials said Monday.

The Central Intelligence Agency, working with foreign security services, was able to seize the bomb—which they believed was intended for a U.S.-bound flight—before the would-be suicide bomber was able to move ahead with his plot, officials said. Because the plot was headed off in its early stages, officials said the effort never represented a threat to Americans or to U.S. allies, nor did airlines face a direct threat.

The bomb was "viable," a senior U.S. counterterrorism official said. The official added that it probably would have gone off but it did have some flaws that may have impacted its ability to detonate properly. The Federal Bureau of Investigation now has the bomb and is analyzing its makeup. The agency hopes to better understand tactics being employed by the al Qaeda affiliate that U.S. officials say poses the greatest danger to the U.S.

In any version of the article, anywhere, you can't find a single mention of the TSA having anything to do with saving us from this scourge. But hey, the TSA's new rule over this will probably be that we all have to fly commando now.

By: Brant

Security Ramping Up In Advance of Bin Laden Anniversary

The US ramping us security - again! - before the anniversary of the hit job on OBL.

While U.S. officials say publicly there is no specific threat of a terror attack, behind the scenes law enforcement officials tell ABC News there are plans for a major security surge at airports and transportation hubs in advance of next week's anniversary of Osama bin Laden's death.
The precautions are based on intelligence reports that al Qaeda is determined to avenge the death of bin Laden, killed by Navy SEALs last May, with a focus on aviation targets.
Of greatest concern to U.S. officials is al Qaeda's Yemeni affiliate, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), and its master bombmaker, Ibrahim al-Asiri, who has survived repeated U.S. efforts to kill him.

By: Brant

An Unmanned Border Crossing With Mexico?

Yep, sounds bat-shit crazy at first, doesn't it? Truth is, after reading the article, I can completely understand their reasoning. I'm still not sure I think it's the best idea, but I can at least conclude that it's not a bad one.

This hardly seems a time the U.S. would be willing to allow people to cross the border legally from Mexico without a customs officer in sight. But in this rugged, remote West Texas terrain where wading across the shallow Rio Grande undetected is all too easy, federal authorities are touting a proposal to open an unmanned port of entry as a security upgrade.
By the spring, kiosks could open up in Big Bend National Park allowing people from the tiny Mexican town of Boquillas del Carmen to scan their identity documents and talk to a customs officer in another location, at least 100 miles away.
The crossing, which would be the nation's first such port of entry with Mexico, has sparked opposition from some who see it as counterintuitive in these days of heightened border security. Supporters say the crossing would give the isolated Mexican town long-awaited access to U.S. commerce, improve conservation efforts and be an unlikely target for criminal operations.

By: Brant

Troubling Numbers on Securing US Southern Border

Although the article is mainly about political promises, the numbers cited in this article about securing the border are troubling, to say the least.

The U.S. Border Patrol says 873 miles of the border, about 44 percent, have been brought under operational control. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has said that "the border is better now than it ever has been."
Still, that means full control isn't even half met. And even getting this far required bolstering the ranks of the Border Patrol to the highest levels ever, from about 9,500 along the border in 2004 to 18,152 today. Immigration and Customs Enforcement also has a record number of agents on the border, and five Predator drones now patrol strategic parts of it, with a sixth coming by the end of the year. About 650 miles of fencing has been constructed, and 1,200 National Guard soldiers dispatched last year to Texas, California, Arizona and New Mexico have had their deployment extended through the end of the year.

There's open warfare on our southern flank, and we're only covering 45% of it? Wow.

By: Brant

NSA Joins Smartphone Era?

Well, OK... Not exactly. But some people inside the NSA are trying to overcome security hurdles to get more productive.

Troy Lange knows that just mentioning cellphones is enough to give security officers heartburn at the National Security Agency.
Lange, as the NSA's mobility mission manager, is developing a smartphone that he wants to bring inside the super-secret U.S. spy agency to access classified information and apps while on the move. He wants it to work as easily as any of the smartphones those that are so ubiquitous in the outside world.
That is no small vision for an agency where entire buildings are designated as Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities, known as SCIFs in spy speak, with many restrictions to ensure the handling and discussion of secret information stays secure.
Visitors to the Fort Meade, Maryland, NSA complex are not allowed to bring outside cellphones into the building.
Lange argues that using smartphones inside areas that deal with secret material will increase efficiency.
"I want to get this into everybody's hands" -- every employee in the Defense Department, intelligence community and across government, he said, while acknowledging that kind of talk makes "the security people's heads pop off."

By: Brant

Americans Working With (or For) Al Qaeda?

It sure makes finding 2 supposed terror suspects that much harder.

Al-Qaida may have sent American terrorists or men carrying U.S. travel documents to launch an attack on Washington or New York to coincide with memorials marking the 10th anniversary of 9/11, government officials say.
One U.S. official says al-Qaida dispatched three men, at least two of whom could be U.S. citizens, to detonate a car bomb in one of the cities. Should that mission prove impossible, the attackers have been told to simply cause as much destruction as they can.
Word that al-Qaida had ordered the mission reached U.S. officials midweek. A CIA informant who has proved reliable in the past approached intelligence officials overseas to say that the men had been ordered by newly minted al-Qaida leader Ayman al Zawahri to mark the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks Sunday by doing harm on U.S. soil.
The tipster says the would-be attackers are of Arab descent and may speak Arabic as well as English. Counterterrorism officials were looking for certain names associated with the threat, but it was unclear whether the names were real or fake.
Counterterrorism officials have been working around the clock to determine whether the threat is accurate, but so far, have been unable to corroborate it, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the investigation.

By: Brant

Some People Are Just Wrong

Really, you'd trade your liberty to fight terrorism?

Surveillance cameras in public places? Sure. Body scans at airports? Maybe. Snooping in personal email? Not so fast.
The same Americans who are increasingly splashing their personal lives across Facebook and Twitter trace a meandering path when asked where the government should draw the line between protecting civil liberties and pursuing terrorism.
Ten years after the 9/11 attacks led to amped-up government surveillance efforts, two-thirds of Americans say it's fitting to sacrifice some privacy and freedoms in the fight against terrorism, according to a poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.
A slim majority — 54 percent — say that if they had to choose between preserving their rights and freedoms and protecting people from terrorists, they'd come down on the side of civil liberties. The public is particularly protective of the privacy of U.S. citizens, voicing sharp opposition to government surveillance of Americans' emails and phone calls.
For some Americans, their reluctance to give up any freedoms is a reflection of their belief that the terrorists eventually will succeed no matter what.

By: Brant

DoD Implements New Command Program for Hurricane Irene Response

The DoD has implements a new program of Dual-Status Commanders for Hurricane Irene relief.

The Department of Defense announced today the appointment of four dual-status commanders in support of relief efforts for Hurricane Irene, marking the first time the dual commander concept has been implemented in support of a natural disaster.

While others may be appointed in the coming days, the initial list of dual-status commanders appointed by the state governors and the Department of Defense for Hurricane Irene is as follows:

Brig. Gen. James Trogden III, North Carolina Army National Guard;

Brig. Gen. Carolyn Protzmann, New Hampshire Air National Guard;

Brig. Gen. Michael Swezey, New York Army National Guard; and

Col. Donald Lagor, Rhode Island Air National Guard.

When agreed upon by the Secretary of Defense and the governor of an affected state, dual-status commanders can direct both federal active-duty forces and state National Guard forces in response to domestic incidents. The concept is intended to foster greater cooperation among federal and state assets during a disaster.

The nation’s governors led the creation of this new opportunity for collaboration. Dual-status commanders ensure that state and federal military forces will work effectively together, when states request federal forces through the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Through this improved leadership, forces responding to Hurricane Irene will be better able to avoid duplication of effort, and provide the life-saving capabilities that governors request.

The dual-status commander concept was formulated in 2009. In March 2011, the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security and the bipartisan 10-member Council of Governors adopted the “Joint Action Plan for Unity of Effort,” strengthening support to governors when they request military assistance for disaster response.

By: Brant

US Government Reaction to Earthquake

Seen online, in reaction to DC being threatened by an earthquake...

Now that such a heinous event has occurred on American soil I'm sure we'll end up with a Department of Homeland Stability

h/t Rich & Rob

warning! politics alert... I'm not advocating for one party or the other, but this did make me chuckle:

According to White House sources, seismologists at the US Geological Survey now believe the quake was caused by slippage along a previously unknown flaw in the Earth's crust that will be named Bush's Fault.

h/t MM

By: Brant

Overzealous "Security" Probably Provides Very Little

The problem with undoing any of the post 9/11 security stupidity is that if the one thing you undid gets exploited 18 years from now because someone else didn't do their job right, it's your ass that goes down in history as the guy who screwed up.

As a staggered nation scrambled after Sept. 11, 2001, to anticipate possible next targets, there was a widespread sanitizing of publicly available information suddenly viewed as tipsheets and road maps for terrorists.
But what also resulted, as shown by an Associated Press review for the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, were some befuddling inconsistencies — telling private pilots not to fly over nuclear reactors, for example, and then not allowing them access to plant locations.
It was all based on a fear that seemingly innocuous fragments of information could be paired to hatch an attack. If authorities couldn't be sure what information might help, they concluded it was best to keep as much secret as possible. Or if total secrecy couldn't be justified, at least make the information much harder to obtain.
Security-sensitive information wasn't just the coordinates of the nation's nuclear power plants, or the locations of massive inventories of dangerous chemicals, or detailed maps of potentially explosive natural gas pipelines. Withheld from public view were things that average citizens might need to know: emergency response plans for public buildings in Idaho, building blueprints in Delaware, and drinking water test results in Texas.

By: Brant

Please, please, please... Someone implement this

Will the TSA finally implement a "trusted travelers" program? And can we please give security clearance holders the option to opt-in to the program based on their security clearance investigations?

The federal government would not need congressional approval to mandate that airlines allow one checked bag free. But it is doubtful that the TSA could implement a trusted-traveler initiative without congressional approval.

Adding impetus to the report is the heavyweight panel behind it, headed by Tom Ridge , former secretary of homeland security, and former congressman Jim Turner (D-Tex.), who was on the House Homeland Security Committee.

Travel industry analysts think the long-awaited report will continue the debate over screening procedures and add another element to it: Even a voluntary trusted-traveler approach would require passengers to provide credit information, tax returns and other personal data to verify that members pose little or no risk.

In return, they would be allowed to zip through security.

Man - after going through TSA 4 times in 3 days last week, I gotta say we sooooooo need this program.

By: Brant

Cyber Attack = Act of War?

A new Pentagon policy has elevated cyber attacks to "acts of war".

The Pentagon has concluded that computer sabotage coming from another country can constitute an act of war, a finding that for the first time opens the door for the U.S. to respond using traditional military force.

The Pentagon's first formal cyber strategy, unclassified portions of which are expected to become public next month, represents an early attempt to grapple with a changing world in which a hacker could pose as significant a threat to U.S. nuclear reactors, subways or pipelines as a hostile country's military.

In part, the Pentagon intends its plan as a warning to potential adversaries of the consequences of attacking the U.S. in this way. "If you shut down our power grid, maybe we will put a missile down one of your smokestacks," said a military official.

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

Changes Coming to US Security Clearance Process

Defense.gov News Release: DOD Announces Improvements To The Personnel Security Clearance Process

The Department of Defense (DoD) released information today about improvements made to the personnel security clearance process. Over the past four years, the DoD has worked with the Director of National Intelligence, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Office of Personnel Management to streamline processes, make changes to policies, introduce extensive information technology improvements, and eliminate a backlog of approximately 100,000 pending cases. These improvements led to a 72 percent reduction in the time it takes to process an individual’s security clearance – from an average of 165 days in 2006 to 47 days today.

"The substantive changes that we have made to our personnel security clearance process significantly enhance our safeguarding of classified materials and the quality of life of our service members and civilian employees," said Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn.

The improvements also led the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to recently remove the DoD personnel security clearance process from its "high risk list." Originally added to the high list risk in 2005, removal of the personnel security clearance process marks the first time the GAO has removed a DoD area from the list since its 1990 inception. The GAO also credited the DoD with improving the quality and oversight of its investigative and adjudicative processes.

"The Department of Defense was steadfast in its commitment to substantially improve performance in this area,” said Deputy Chief Management Officer Elizabeth McGrath. “Not only because of the personal inconvenience experienced by individuals when navigating the clearance process, but also because delays in processing security clearances can cause delays in placing highly-qualified individuals in the cleared positions that need them. Additionally, the improvements made in the quality of our clearance decisions will ensure that we better safe-guard our nation’s critical secrets."

By: Brant

Bye Bye TSA?

Transportation Security Administration personnel may soon be replaced by private security officers at some major US airports.

Every spring, private security officers at San Francisco International Airport compete in a workplace "March Madness"-style tournament for cash prizes, some as high as $1,500.

The games: finding illegal items and explosives in carry-on bags; successfully picking locks on difficult-to-open luggage; and spotting a would-be terrorist (in this case Covenant Aviation Security's president, Gerald L. Berry) on security videos.

"The bonuses are pretty handsome," Berry said. "We have to be good - equal or better than the feds. So we work at it, and we incentivize."

Some of the nation's biggest airports are responding to recent public outrage over security screening by weighing whether they should hire private firms such as Covenant to replace the Transportation Security Administration. Sixteen airports, including San Francisco and Kansas City International Airport, have made the switch since 2002. One Orlando airport has approved the change but needs to select a contractor, and several others are seriously considering it.

The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, which governs Dulles International and Reagan National airports, is studying the option, spokeswoman Tara Hamilton said.

For airports, the change isn't about money. At issue, airport managers and security experts say, is the unwieldy size and bureaucracy of the federal aviation security system. Private firms may be able to do the job more efficiently and with a personal touch, they argue.

Airports that choose private screeners must submit the request to the TSA. There are no specific criteria for approval, but federal officials can decide whether to grant the request "based on the airport's record of compliance on security regulations and requirements." The TSA pays for the cost of the screening and has the final say on which company gets the contract.

By: Shelldrake

Possible New Years Terror Attack Feared By India

Authorities in India have tightened security in the face of a new terror threat.

India increased security in major cities across the country Tuesday after receiving information that a Pakistan-based militant group was planning an attack over New Year's weekend.

More police were deployed to city streets, including in India's financial capital, Mumbai, which was attacked in 2008. Airports and railway stations and the popular beach resort state of Goa all tightened security following intelligence reports that the banned militant group, Lashkar-e-Taiba was planning to target these places, an official with the Home Ministry said. He spoke on condition of anonymity as he was not authorized to speak to the media.

India has taken even minor terror threats seriously since a three-day terrorist siege killed 166 people in Mumbai, though there has been no major attack there since.

Security has been high in Mumbai since Friday, when police began searching for four men who authorities believe entered the city to carry out a terrorist attack. Computer-aided photographs of the four suspects were released.

On Tuesday, police made house-to-house searches in some parts of the city and tightened security checks at bus and train stations, churches and markets.

By: Shelldrake

GrogNews Daily Headlines

Has the "covert war" already begun inside Iran? And will it do any more than delay the inevitable? It remains to be seen what, if any, effect it'll have on six-power talks with Iran.

Afghan support for the "insurgency" is rising, at least according to one questionably-scientific poll out there.

A suicide bomb has killed 50 in Pakistan. And another WikiLeaks revelation: the Saudis are deeply involved in Pakistani affairs.

China is telling the US that the Korean situation could get out of control. Uh yeah, because the People's Democratic Republic of Crazyland are off the rails. And to show their strength, the Southies are holding naval firing drills.

Among the other WikiLeaks, a list of facilities "vital to US security". Yay.

By: Brant

SecDef on WikiLeaks and Diplomatic Cables

From last week's briefing where he talks about the way the US government leaks like a sieve...

One of the common themes that I heard from the time I was a senior agency official in the early 1980s in every military engagement we were in was the complaint of the lack of adequate intelligence support. That began to change with the Gulf War in 1991, but it really has changed dramatically after 9/11.

And clearly the finding that the lack of sharing of information had prevented people from, quote, unquote, “connecting the dots” led to much wider sharing of information, and I would say especially wider sharing of information at the front, so that no one at the front was denied – in one of the theaters, Afghanistan or Iraq – was denied any information that might possibly be helpful to them.

Now, obviously, that aperture went too wide. There’s no reason for a young officer at a forward operating post in Afghanistan to get cables having to do with the START negotiations. And so we’ve taken a number of mitigating steps in the department. I directed a number of these things to be undertaken in August.

First, the – an automated capability to monitor workstations for security purposes. We’ve got about 60 percent of this done, mostly in – mostly stateside. And I’ve directed that we accelerate the completion of it.

Second, as I think you know, we’ve taken steps in CENTCOM in September and now everywhere to direct that all CD and DVD write capability off the network be disabled. We have – we have done some other things in terms of two-man policies – wherever you can move information from a classified system to an unclassified system, to have a two-person policy there.

And then we have some longer-term efforts under way in which we can – and, first of all, in which we can identify anomalies, sort of like credit card companies do in the use of computer; and then finally, efforts to actually tailor access depending on roles. But let me say – let me address the latter part of your question. This is obviously a massive dump of information.

First of all, I would say unlike the Pentagon Papers, one of the things that is important, I think, in all of these releases, whether it’s Afghanistan, Iraq or the releases this week, is the lack of any significant difference between what the U.S. government says publicly and what these things show privately, whereas the Pentagon Papers showed that many in the government were not only lying to the American people, they were lying to themselves.

But let me – let me just offer some perspective as somebody who’s been at this a long time. Every other government in the world knows the United States government leaks like a sieve, and it has for a long time. And I dragged this up the other day when I was looking at some of these prospective releases. And this is a quote from John Adams: “How can a government go on, publishing all of their negotiations with foreign nations, I know not. To me, it appears as dangerous and pernicious as it is novel.”

When we went to real congressional oversight of intelligence in the mid-’70s, there was a broad view that no other foreign intelligence service would ever share information with us again if we were going to share it all with the Congress. Those fears all proved unfounded.

Now, I’ve heard the impact of these releases on our foreign policy described as a meltdown, as a game-changer, and so on. I think – I think those descriptions are fairly significantly overwrought. The fact is, governments deal with the United States because it’s in their interest, not because they like us, not because they trust us, and not because they believe we can keep secrets.

Many governments – some governments deal with us because they fear us, some because they respect us, most because they need us. We are still essentially, as has been said before, the indispensable nation. So other nations will continue to deal with us. They will continue to work with us. We will continue to share sensitive information with one another. Is this embarrassing? Yes. Is it awkward? Yes. Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest.

By: Brant

Weekend Humor: TSA Slogans

Would you believe Mom passed this on?! MOM!

1. Can't see London, can't see France, unless we see your underpants.

2. Grope discounts available.

3. If we did our job any better, we'd have to buy you dinner first.

4. Only we know if Lady Gaga is really a lady.

5. Don't worry, my hands are still warm from the last guy.

6. Throw a few back at the airport Chili's and you won't even notice.

7. Wanna fly? Drop yours.

8. We've handled more balls than Barney Frank.

9. We are now free to move about your pants.

10. We rub you the wrong way, so you can be on your way.

11. It's not a grope. It's a freedom pat.

12. When in doubt, we make you whip it out.

13. TSA: Touchin', Squeezin', Arrestin'.

14. You were a virgin.

15. We handle more packages than UPS.

16. TSA isn't silly, they just want to touch your willy.

17. Stroke of the hand, law of the land.

18. No Shirt, No Shoes, No Problem.

19. Let your fingers do the Walking.

20. Cough.

21. Reach out and touch someone.

22. Can you feel me now?

23. When we're done with you, you'll need a cigarette.

By: Chuckles

GrogNews Late Daily Headlines

WikiLeaks keeps dripping... They've been forced to change domain servers due to DNA attacks. They're under legislative attack by Senator Lieberman, and ASSange is still wanted on a warrant his lawyer says isn't valid. Wired says that the leak hasn't "broken" U.S. Intelligence... yet.
Today's leak 'revelations'? Karzai is "paranoid". Oh, and gravity holds people to the planet. There was a 'spat' between the US and UK over spy flights from Cyprus.

South Korea is raising the rhetoric and promising air strikes if the Norks attack again.

Puntland is standing up a private military that has the US concerned.

The Ivorian military has sealed the borders after the government declared the winner in the recent election.

More uniformed grumbling over the end of DADT.

And we need to stop panicking over incompetent terrorists, says Ackerman. Hell, Kung Fu Monkey has been telling you to "sack up" for years.

By: Brant