Special Report

Correction and clarification re: The unholy trinity of electronic snooping: Bolton, Negroponte and Hayden

By Wayne Madsen
Online Journal Contributing Writer

Download a .pdf file for printing.
Adobe Acrobat Reader required.
Click here to download a free copy.

May 18, 2005—Steptoe & Johnson LLC sent this journalist a letter, dated May10, 2005, regarding the May 5, 2005 article headlined, The unholy trinity of electronic snooping: Bolton, Negroponte and Hayden.

In the letter, Steptoe & Johnson demands a retraction of the following sentence, [that it's client, CACI, has engaged in] "questionable and possibly illegal procurement conflicts of interest." Steptoe & Johnson claims that this is "unadulterated libel." Steptoe & Johnson adds, "CACI is not aware of any conflicts of interest related to its work on the named programs."

CACI was mentioned in the context of two National Security Agency (NSA) outsourcing contracts—Trailblazer and Groundbreaker—that have come under criticism by intelligence professionals inside and outside NSA.

The author regrets that the sentence in question may make it appear that CACI was also involved in the troubled Trailblazer contract, where major conflicts of interest are alleged by NSA employees. Steptoe & Johnson uses the word "programs" in stating that its client, CACI, is "not aware of any conflicts of interest related to its work on the named programs (there are only two named programs in the article in question: Trailblazer and Groundbreaker). Unless CACI provides the author with additional information, it cannot be ascertained if CACI is or was involved with the Trailblazer contract and the conflict of interests charges that have been alleged by NSA employees with regard to that particular signals intelligence upgrade contract.

The author did not intend to merely single out Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) and CACI, which are members of the Groundbreaker contract team called "Eagle Alliance," as being involved in what many NSA employees consider a questionable contract that is possibly violative of the Clinger/Cohen Act (CCA) of 1996, which mandates that the CIO insure systems are interoperable, secure and meet mission needs. The author should have been mentioned the other Groundbreaker team members whom NSA personnel are charging with incompetence, fraud, and waste. In addition to CACI and Eagle Alliance team leader CSC, other Eagle Alliance members include Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, Keane Federal Systems, Omen Inc., ACS Defense, BTG, Compaq, TRW, Windemere, Fiber Plus, Verizon and Superior Communications. The author regrets that an attempt at brevity resulted in CACI and another firm—CSC—being identified when other firms in the Eagle Alliance may be culpable in the failed Groundbreaker contract.

In a December 5, 2001 press release, the Eagle Alliance claimed it would "provide the NSA with a reliable, secure, modernized IT [information technology] infrastructure in the areas of distributed computing, networks, enterprise management and telephony. The solution includes state-of-the-art desktops, servers, office automation tools, secure and nonsecure voice and video services, and fast and reliable access to NSA networks." NSA sources and correspondence reveal that this is not the case.

The author is in possession of a number of confidential NSA internal memos that indicate that Groundbreaker's Eagle Alliance is rife with incompetence, lack of support for U.S. and allied servicemen and women in combat abroad, and mismanagement. The author stands by the poor performance and nonperformance allegations concerning members of the Eagle Alliance. He also stands by the conflict of interest charge regarding implementation of the Groundbreaker contract, to wit, members of the Eagle Alliance colluded with NSA's ITIS (Information Technology Infrastructure Services) Directorate to gain access to sensitive For Official Use Only personnel rosters that allowed the Eagle Alliance to use the internal NSA network to hire all of the existing NSA IT personnel.