- Gentlemen, start your drones: Judge’s ruling opens door for commercial use
- Soldier who hid, bragged about not saluting flag to be punished — in secret
- ‘Maverick’ of the seas: ‘Top Gun’ school for U.S. ship officers to launch
- Putin declares Sochi Paralympics open amid Ukrainian protest
- ‘In Jesus name, we pray’ sparks ire at Ohio council meeting
- Navy’s first laser weapon ready for prime time; drone killer to deploy this summer
- Billionaire backer: Rick Santorum ‘needs to be heard’ in 2016
- Obamacare fallout: 49 percent pessimistic; 45 percent ‘scared’
- DHS accused of holding U.S. citizen at airport, using emails to pry into her sex life
- Seattle socialist: Minimum-wage discussion skewed by ‘right-wing’ GAO analysis
Taxpayers must pay the freight for over-budget train projects
Topic - Michael V. Hayden
Was it al Qaeda "core," al Qaeda "prime" or al Qaeda "central," or was it an al Qaeda "affiliate" an al Qaeda "linked" or an al Qaeda "inspired" group? Or was it just al Qaeda?
Current and former U.S. officials, congressional sources and outside analysts briefed on the attack told The Washington Times on Monday that the U.S. intelligence community's assessment about al Qaeda's links to the Benghazi tragedy has not changed.
It is as though Obamacare had an international equivalent. While Americans were busy celebrating Black Friday and Cyber Monday, the fallout continued from the administration's recent decision to conclude a covenant of death with Iran.
In its relentless effort to expand its surveillance capabilities, the National Security Agency has eroded trust in the process that secures online financial transactions and forms the foundations of privacy and security on the Web, computer scientists and Internet security specialists say.
EXCLUSIVE — As President Obama ran to election victory last fall with claims that al Qaeda was “decimated” and “on the run,” his intelligence team was privately offering an assessment that the terror network was shifting resources to emerging spinoff groups in Africa that posed fresh threats.
Former CIA Director Michael V. Hayden said Thursday that he "reluctantly" backs a military strike against the Syrian government and that President Obama painted the United States into a corner by saying the use of chemical weapons represented a "red line" for his administration.
If the bald eagle weren't our "national animal," what would be the most popular choice for the role? The bison wins, according to a YouGov poll released Sunday, cited by 22 percent of the respondents.
When retired Air Force Gen. Michael V. Hayden headed the CIA, one question vexed him so much that he set up a special working group to help him answer it: "Will America be able to conduct espionage in the future, inside a political culture that every day demands more and more transparency in every facet of national life?" Mr. Hayden said the working group "came back with the answer, more or less: 'We're not sure.'"
The start of the National Security Agency's rise in power can be traced to the first years after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, when new laws, secret presidential orders and lots of cash emboldened it to sweep up billions of communications.
Former Rep. Peter Hoekstra, who was chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, recalls a cryptic telephone call from the White House in August 2004: "Come on over. We've got something to tell you."
Whether we like to admit it or not, the war on terrorism is still being fought. The immediate challenge is to identify the best strategy to permanently defeat the terrorist menace. Unless you share Gen. Michael V. Hayden's defeatist view of world affairs, that is.
Reports are released every day in Washington, but one that could prove to be of life-or-death importance was unveiled last week by the Henry Jackson Society, a bipartisan think tank with headquarters in London. "Al-Qaeda in the United States: A Complete Analysis of Terrorism Offenses" holds up a mirror to America and provides us with a clear but terrifying image.
In most countries, secrecy shrouds the workings of state intelligence services. Israel's Mossad sets a gold standard for such organizations, especially in operational effectiveness. Almost invariably, Mossad chiefs are promoted from within and possess extensive operational experience.
Mitt Romney has assembled a foreign-policy platform rooted in the belief that adversaries such as Russia must be confronted for backsliding on democracy and that Israel must be supported in the face of common threats such as a nuclear-armed Iran.
Mitt Romney's corps of advisers is heavily salted with figures who surrounded President George W. Bush as he watched over massive increases in federal spending, the creation of more government programs and the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the nation-building efforts that followed.
"It was never a hierarchy and to the degree that it was an organization, it is now a movement," he said, stressing that the movement has become "far more amorphous" than it was a decade ago.
"It's one of those things where if you study it too hard, you destroy the specimen," Mr. Hayden told The Times in an interview.