November 14, 2015
Can France’s Failure To Discover The Terrorist Act Beforehand Be Traced To The Edward Snowden Leaks?
Lots of questions are being asked about why French authorities failed to sniff out that such a major, highly coordinated terrorist attack was about to occur on the streets of Paris yesterday. With their many years of fighting Islamic insurgents in Algeria, the French have more experience than anyone else in the West, in combatting these kind of threats, in highly urbanized, and congested spaces. Developing a network of informants, and keeping a pulse on the alleyways and slums of the urban ghetto is something that the French do well — at least they used to. But, I wonder if part of the French intelligence and security failure can be traced to Edward Snowden.
Edward Snowden ‘Has Blood On His Hands’
Jay Akbar, writing on the June 13, 2015 DailyMailOnline, notes that Security Services have reported ‘increasing difficulties’ in tracking terrorists and dangerous criminals via email, chat rooms, and social media — since he [Snowden] exposed Western intelligence gathering [sources and methods],”The London Sunday Times reported. Mr. Akbar adds that senior “aides to British Prime Minister David Cameron’s office confirmed [to the DailyMailOnline], “the Top Secret [encrypted] material is now in the hands of China and Russia.” “it has meant agents have had to be moved; and, that knowledge of how we operate has stopped us [from] getting vital information.” “A British intelligence source added……”Snowden has done incalculable damage. In some cases, agencies have been forced to intervene; and, lift their agents from operations to prevent them from being identified and killed. we know Russia and China have a access to Snowden’s material; and, will be going through it for years to come, searching for clues to identify potential targets.”
“Former GCHQ Director [NSA’s ‘sister’ agency in Britain], Sir David Omand, believes the leak represents a “huge strategic setback,” which is “harming Britain, America, and her NATO allies.” Sir David Omand added, “the leak could spark a ‘global intelligence arms race,’ adding: ‘I have no doubt whatever the programs are being launched; and, money is being spent to try and catch up. That’s probably not just true of China and Russia; but, a number of other nations who have seen some of this material to be published.”
“I am not at all surprised that people are being pulled back; and, operations where people [agents] are exposed….are having to be shut down, at least for the moment.” Robin Simcox, writing in the June 9, 2015 edition of Britain’s newspaper — The Independent, wrote “quantifying the damage has not always been easy.” “If a terrorist suspect dropped off the radar, post-June 23, 2013 [post-Snowden], “it could not always be proved,” that an individual went silent — as a result of what Edward Snowden had disclosed. “Regardless,” Mr. Simcox contends, “there are trends emerging.”
“First,’ Mr. Simcox writes, “a series of ongoing intelligence [collection] operations had to be abandoned. They [these operations] had been predicated on the pre-June 2013 assumption that they could take place….without fear of discovery, or attribution. Snowden removed that element of doubt, so the operations were [had to be] scrapped.”
“Second,” he notes, “there is the knowledge that state adversaries have gone to town on the methodologies [sources and methods of collection] that the Snowden files revealed. There is significant fear that China, and Russia, for example, have taken stock of Western intelligence agencies’ own cyber strategies; and, are now going to deploy them back against the United States and its allies.” Indeed, perhaps the recent massive breach of OPM’s IT enterprise, may well have been birthed — as a consequence of what China learned from these disclosures; or, from Mr. Snowden — when he was in Hong Kong; and, likely under the auspices of China’s State Security Service.
“When it comes to stopping terrorist attacks, groups that seek to harm the West also now have an advanced understanding about our capacity to stop them,” Mr. Simcox writes, something that I have been writing about for the past two years. He adds that “a jihadist video released in January (2015), onto an online jihadist platform, explained just some of what mujahideen fighters had taken from Snowden [the leaks]: “All mobile phone providers use the same software, your device continuously in contact with the nearest tower,” it says. “Your different coordinates are tracked and stored. All your calls, messages, and Internet history are stored in this same place. With his phone, tablet, or laptop, the enemy can listen/record all conversations and meetings.”
“The video also provided advice on how; and, how to avoid detection, listing software packages that protect against surveillance; and, where to acquire them from,” Mr. Simcox wrote.
“Snowden’s disclosures have led to changes in the way that terrorists communicate,” Mr. Simcox writes, again — something I have extensively covered here in the blog. “One senior U.S. official told me [Mr. Simcox], that post-Snowden, this “was the most significant change,” that had taken place; and, others have corroborated that this shift has occurred. Speaking in November 2013, then Chair of the House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Mike Rogers, said that Snowden’s disclosures had allowed three different al-Qaida affiliates to change the way they communicate.” This isn’t new news; and, again is something that I have covered extensively — and, there are several articles on the blog that can be accessed if you so desire.
The bottom line is that because of Edward Snowden’s reckless leaks — which exposed highly sensitive sources and methods — most of which had nothing to do with the meta-data bulk phone collection — the Islamic State, al Qaeda, and others of their ilk know how to better evade our attempts to find out what they’re up to. And, one has to wonder if his leaks helped those who just carried out the Paris attacks — to stay hidden till the act occurred?
No comments:
Post a Comment