Booz Allen Hamilton, federal contractor
Christian Science Monitor
Edward Snowden, the man who leaked details of the National Security Agency's secret PRISM data-mining program and the use of broad warrants to monitor vast amounts of data passing through US telecommunications companies like Verizon, was working ...
Jon Rapport brings up very good points as to why CIA,NSA 'whistleblower' Ed Snowden may still be led by masters with their own agenda.Also I wrote some years ago about the CIA's conflict of interest in being involved in 'public companies' and stock scams and frauds using offshore accounts to rob their fellow Americans ! With 'friends' or 'patriots' like the CIA who needs enemies ?
Now as you can read below Snowden claims one of the first things that soured him on his CIA colleagues in Switzerland was their setting up of a banker and having got him in a compromising position,using him,which is their modus operandi for as long as they've existed so what else is new ?Snowden or some other ethical soul buried or embedded within the 'intelligence' community should disclose the CIA's involvement in stocks for profit and for money laundering purposes and the connection between CIA and U.S.Treasury Department spying on international finacial transactions at SWIFT in Belgium that records those transactions.It is clearly a conflict of interest that an agencyor agencies,CIA,NSA,SEC,FBIet.al., that is supposed to protect and fight all illegal activury should instead use its priviledged spying popsition to have a heads up above others to benefit from stock or securities and financial insider infornation.Ex W Bush U.S.Treasury Saaecretary certainly did that with the CIA's help and blessings after they both sequestered SWIFT of Belgium during the W Bush regime to spy upon international financial transactions through SWIFT !
If Snowden knows as much as he claims then Americans could get much info from him regarding those offshore accounts of CIA employees and ex employees and of their collusion with international elites in Switzerland the City of London,Israel and other offshore centersaround the world where U.S.stocks were targeted for shorting by thrm and thus dollars drained from American investmentsd in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac etc. whrn this government organized ponzi scheme collapsed in 2008 and the SEC Chair Chris Cox cynically and lieingly announced that their shares collapse in bvalue due to 'naked shorting' a tem dreamed up by CIA connected Agora Inc of Baltimore with its City of London and international money laundering cxonnections and may like other 'companies' using the name Agora,be a Rothschild fronbt as well as a CIA front because the CIA are anti-American parasites and certsainly not just misled 'patriots'.
''Snowden says that during this period, in Geneva, one of the incidents that really sours him on the CIA is the “turning of a Swiss banker.” One night, CIA guys get a banker drunk, encourage him to drive home, the banker gets busted, the CIA guys help him out, then with that bond formed, they eventually get the banker to reveal deep banking secrets to the Agency.
''Snowden is this naïve? He doesn’t know by now that the CIA does this sort of thing all the time? He’s shocked? He “didn’t sign up for this?”
''In 2009, Snowden leaves the CIA. Why? Presumably because he’s disillusioned. It should noted here that Snowden claimed he could do very heavy damage to the entire US intelligence community in 2008, but decided to wait because he thought Obama, just coming into the presidency, might make good changes.
''After two years with the CIA in Geneva, Snowden really had the capability to take down the whole US intelligence network, or a major chunk of it? He had that much access to classified data? '' - Jon Rappoport
NSA leaker: are there serious cracks in Ed Snowden’s story?
By Jon Rappoport
June 10, 2013
First, I’m not doubting the documents Ed Snowden has brought forward. I’m not doubting the illegal reach of the NSA in spying on Americans and the world.
But as to how this recent revelation happened, and whether Ed Snowden’s history holds up…I have questions.
Could Snowden have been given extraordinary access to classified info as part of a larger scheme? Could he be a) an honest man and yet b) a guy who was set up to do what he’s doing now?
If b) is true, then Snowden fits the bill perfectly. He wants to do what he’s doing. He isn’t lying about that. He means what he says.
Okay. Let’s look at his history as reported by The Guardian.
In 2003, at age 19, without a high school diploma, Snowden enlists in the Army. He begins a training program to join the Special Forces. The sequence here is fuzzy. At what point after enlistment can a new soldier start this training program? Does he need to demonstrate some exceptional ability before Special Forces puts him in that program?
Snowden breaks both legs in a training exercise. He’s discharged from the Army. Is that automatic? How about healing and then resuming Army service? Just asking.
If he was accepted in the Special Forces training program because he had special computer skills, then why discharge him simply because he broke both legs?
Circa 2003 (?), Snowden gets a job as a security guard for an NSA facility at the University of Maryland. He specifically wanted to work for NSA? It was just a generic job opening he found out about?
Also in 2003 (?), Snowden shifts jobs. He’s now in the CIA, in IT. He has no high school diploma. He’s a young computer genius?
In 2007, Snowden is sent to Geneva. He’s only 23 years old. The CIA gives him diplomatic cover there. He’s put in charge of maintaining computer-network security. Major job. Obviously, he has access to a very wide range of classified documents. Sound a little odd? Again, just asking. He’s just a kid. Maybe he has his GED by now. Otherwise, he still doesn’t have a high school diploma.
Snowden says that during this period, in Geneva, one of the incidents that really sours him on the CIA is the “turning of a Swiss banker.” One night, CIA guys get a banker drunk, encourage him to drive home, the banker gets busted, the CIA guys help him out, then with that bond formed, they eventually get the banker to reveal deep banking secrets to the Agency.
Snowden is this naïve? He doesn’t know by now that the CIA does this sort of thing all the time? He’s shocked? He “didn’t sign up for this?”
In 2009, Snowden leaves the CIA. Why? Presumably because he’s disillusioned. It should noted here that Snowden claimed he could do very heavy damage to the entire US intelligence community in 2008, but decided to wait because he thought Obama, just coming into the presidency, might make good changes.
After two years with the CIA in Geneva, Snowden really had the capability to take down the whole US intelligence network, or a major chunk of it? He had that much access to classified data?
Anyway, in 2009, Snowden leaves the CIA and goes to work for a private defense contractor. Apparently, by this time, he knows all about the phony US war in Iraq, and yet he chooses to work for a sector that relentlessly promotes such wars. Go figure.
This defense contractor (unnamed) assigns him to work at an NSA facility in Japan. Surely, Snowden understands what the NSA is. He knows it’s a key part of the whole military-intelligence network, the network he opposes.
But he takes the job anyway. Perhaps he’s doing it so he can obtain further access to classified data, in advance of blowing a big whistle. Perhaps.
Snowden goes on to work for two private defense contractors, Dell and Booze Allen Hamilton. In this latter job, Snowden is again assigned to work at the NSA.
He’s an outsider, but he claims to have so much sensitive NSA data that he can take down the whole US intelligence network in a single day. Hmm.
These are red flags. They raise questions. Serious ones.
If The Guardian, which has such close access to Snowden, wants to explore these questions, they might come up with some interesting answers.
Again, I’m not doubting that the documents Snowden has brought forward are real. I have to assume they are. I certainly don’t doubt the reach and the power and the criminality of the NSA.
Although I’m sure someone will write me and say I’m defending the NSA. I’M NOT.
But if Snowden was maneuvered, in his career, without his knowing it, to arrive at just this point, then we have a whole new story. We have a story about unknown forces who wanted this exposure to occur.
Who would these forces be? I could make lots of guesses. But they would just be guesses.
Perhaps all the anomalies in the career of Ed Snowden can be explained with sensible answers. I realize that. But until they are, I put the questions forward. And leave them there.
The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com
SEC,Christopher Cox,Hillary Clinton and Barbara Boxer Aid CIA'S In-Q-Tel penny stock fraud
CIA INC. STINKS
THE SPY AGENCY SHOULD CLOSE ITS VENTURE CAPITAL FIRM
May 15, 2006 -- IF former National Security Agency chief Michael Hayden hangs in there as President Bush's nominee to head the CIA and makes it to a Senate confirmation hearing, one of the panel's members should ask him this:
"Sir, please tell the committee how much further you anticipate allowing the CIA to expand its presence on Wall Street via the private venture capital firm known as In-Q-Tel, Inc."
Hayden came under withering fire in Washington last week as word spread that the ex-NSA chief had presided over the White House's post-9/11 surveillance program of monitoring domestic U.S. telephone calls. The White House, politically weakened from a year of setbacks both at home and abroad, may decide to withdraw Hayden from consideration and submit an alternative nominee burdened with less civil liberties baggage.
Yet whoever winds up in the CIA's top job will inherit a developing mess involving In-Q-Tel that was largely ignored by the agency's departing director, Porter Goss. Hints that all is not well with In-Q-Tel have begun seeping into view as this little-known domestic CIA front operation continues to funnel agency money into penny stock and micro-cap companies in Wall Street's murkiest back alleys.
Two In-Q-Tel CEOs have resigned from the six-year-old venture capital fund in just the last four months; the fund is being run on a day-to-day basis by a man from Washington's politically greased Carlyle Group who has been with In-Q-Tel for only a few weeks. Headhunters are said to be having trouble coming up with candidates for a permanent replacement.
And there are even reports, largely unconfirmed, that the Securities and Exchange Commision is looking into several penny stock promoters with ties to In-Q-Tel.
Launched in 1999 by CIA director George Tenet as a Wall Street venture fund to finance new technologies for the spy world, In-Q-Tel quickly found friends on Capitol Hill, where policymakers seized on the fund as a way to remind constituents that the ghost of Vietnam no longer walked the land. The attacks of 9/11 gave In-Q-Tel even more stature in Congress, where the fund came to be seen as an essential element in the war effort.
Yet the public's visceral reaction to last week's NSA revelations suggests that war or no war, a backlash against government snooping may be starting. And that in turn promises to crank up the heat under In-Q-Tel, where at least some of the fund's investments raise questions of judgment regarding how taxpayer money is being spent by the organization, as well as who it is choosing for business partners.
A year ago, this column drew back the curtain on a fishy In-Q-Tel in vestment, financed out of the black box budget of the CIA, in a defense-sector start-up called Ionatron Inc.
Run by a longtime Wall Street regulatory violator named Robert Howard, Ionatron used a cash infusion from In-Q-Tel to promote itself around Washington as the developer of a laser-equipped, remotely controlled device the size of a golf cart that could patrol the highways of Iraq, ferreting out and detonating insurgent land mines ahead of troop movements.
We warned in this space that the technology being trumpeted by Ionatron was not only unproven, but had been obtained by Howard and some midlevel researchers at Raytheon Corp. under highly irregular circumstances designed to persuade a West Coast laser researcher into turning over his research to Howard's group.
Nonetheless, Sen. Hillary Clinton and her Democratic colleague from California, Barbara Boxer, quickly embraced the Ionatron program, which eventually devoured more than $12 million in government funding before the Pentagon finally concluded last week that the devices are not reliable and cancelled plans to deploy them.
Ionatron's stock price has tumbled more than a third in the last three weeks, leaving the company's largest investor - prominent hedge fund SAC Capital Advisors, run by Steven A. Cohen of Connecticut - sitting with millions in paper losses.
SAC Capital has acknowledged that it is under investigation by the SEC in what appears to be a separate matter involving stock trading, and the SEC may soon start taking a look into the hedge fund's buying of Ionatron's shares.
In-Q-Tel's growing portfolio of investments includes a few successes. Yet the fund has more often poured money into companies that were barking dogs long before In-Q-Tel showed up, and have failed to improve since.
Consider a North Carolina outfit called ID Technologies Corp., which began life in 1994 as CardGuard International Inc. to promote a fingerprint identification system no one wanted to buy. In the four years that followed, the company racked up losses of $3 million on a mere $92,000 in revenues.
In 1998, the company changed its name to ID Technologies and added $2.5 million more to the loss column on barely $100,000 more in revenues.
Along the way, In-Q-Tel popped up with plans to invest $400,000 more in ID Tech, but the firm collapsed, leaving investors with $5.58 million in cumulative losses and a stock that now sells for a fraction of a penny per share.
Another In-Q-Tel investment, in a data software company called Convera Corp., may be headed in the same direction, bearing much greater losses. In 2004 the fund took a stake in Convera, which had yet to turn a profit while piling up more than $1 billion in cumulative losses since its founding in the mid-1980s.
By the end of 2005, a resulting bounce in Convera stock had topped out at $16, and the shares have since lost half their value. Last week they were trading below $8 on investor disenchantment with the perennial money loser's latest offering: an Internet search engine for extracting information from video files.
Because its funding comes from the CIA, In-Q-Tel has been an irresistible target for conspiracy theorists who charge that the CIA is somehow linked through it to every penny stock that goes south.
Last week, one left-leaning Web site reported that SEC investigators think the CIA-backed venture fund has been steering money into penny stock "pump and dump" firms in Israel, Dubai and Malaysia.
But a day's worth of phoning around traces these claims to a tireless complainant named Tony Ryals, who has been bombarding the SEC and Internet message boards for years with claims that he has uncovered a submerged world of In-Q-Tel-linked fraud stretching for Kuala Lumpur to the Middle East.
The alleged linkages are bewildering in their complexity and typically impossible to follow, but conspiracy buffs find them irresistible, since they seem to echo some of the CIA's worst excesses from 30 to 40 years ago, and by their nature, they can never be entirely disproved.
WHETHER the SEC has looked into Ryals' charges and found them baseless isn't known, but thanks to In-Q-Tel and the lengthening shadow of the CIA on Wall Street, the most improbable of such claims once again have a whiff of credibility.
Bottom line: There are many sensible ways the CIA could have gone about developing the technologies it needs, but funneling money into Wall Street via an outfit like In-Q-Tel was never one of them. So it will be a good thing for Wall Street - and for America, too - if the CIA's next spymaster simply shuts the operation down.
cbyron (at) nypost.com
CIA Gains in Hunt for VC CEO
In-Q-Tel downplays chatter about the spy agency’s venture arm
The Post column also flagged comments by frequent Internet poster Tony Ryals, who accuses In-Q-Tel, variously, of participating in penny stock “pump and dump” schemes in a variety of countries, including Dubai, Malaysia, and Israel, with the blogger adding an allegation that the Securities and Exchange Commission was investigating In-Q-Tel.
Mr. Tighe said In-Q-Tel does not invest in public companies, and had no involvement in any of those countries mentioned. “That simply isn’t accurate. We’re open to innovation wherever it is coming from in the world, but we have no activity in those regions,” he said.
He also denied the firm is under investigation by the SEC. Calls to the SEC on the topic drew the expected “no comment.”
Mr. Tighe also said the venture firm has been well-insulated from Washington politics that have rocked the agency since the sudden resignation of CIA Director Porter Goss earlier this month.
“There’s been no repercussions here, in part because we’re structured as a formal year-by-year problem-set definition, and we get input from that from each of the agencies in the intelligence community,” he said. “So our mission is clear, and pre-established. There’s no changes or tweaking coming from the surface of the ocean, if you will. We run beneath all those tides.”
May. 18, 2006
11:28 amSpy-Fund Story vs. Spy-Fund Story
As lawmakers on Thursday prepared to grill the man who may be the next director of the Central Intelligence Agency, the C.I.A.’s venture capital activities were stirring up a debate of their own.
As New York Post columnist Chris Byron tells it, In-Q-Tel, the C.I.A.-funded venture firm, is a stumbling, bumbling mess of an operation. It invests in money-losing companies, fools around with penny stocks and can’t keep chief executives in their jobs, Mr. Byron wrote in his May 15 column.
Mr. Byron noted that the firm has lost two chief executives in the past four months and said it is having trouble finding a replacement.
On Wednesday, The Red Herring followed up on Mr. Byron’s claims. It interviewed Donald Tighe, In-Q-Tel’s vice president of marketing and communications, who said the firm has a list of promising candidates for the chief executive job. Furthermore, the company’s portfolio has shown overall returns of more than 26 percent, he added. Some In-Q-Tel-backed companies do lose money, The Red Herring wrote in its unsigned article, “a situation not unknown to all venture firms.”
In his column, Mr. Byron made reference to Tony Ryals, who, he wrote, “has been bombarding the S.E.C. and Internet message boards for years with claims that he has uncovered a submerged world of In-Q-Tel-linked fraud stretching for Kuala Lumpur to the Middle East.”
According to Mr. Byron, Mr. Ryals’ complaints earlier this month were picked up by a “left-leaning Web site” that “reported that S.E.C. investigators think the C.I.A.-backed venture fund has been steering money into penny stock ‘pump and dump’ firms in Israel, Dubai and Malaysia.”
The firm’s linkages “are bewildering in their complexity” and “typically impossible to follow,” Mr. Byron wrote, “but conspiracy buffs find them irresistible.” As does, apparently, at least one newspaper columnist.
Mr. Byron’s declaration that In-Q-Tel “continues to funnel agency money into penny stock and micro-cap companies in Wall Street’s murkiest back alleys” is also countered in The Red Herring. “In-Q-Tel does not invest in public companies,” Mr. Tighe said. Further, it has “no involvement in any of those countries mentioned” by Mr. Ryals.