Slashdot Mirror


Top Secret America

mahiskali writes "The Washington Post published an immense interactive website today, detailing the companies and government agencies currently doing top secret work in the United States. Everything from counter-IED operations to human intelligence is touched upon. Citing various interviews with 'super users' and through exhaustive analysis of public records for over two years, this interactive site allows users to peer into the guarded world of top secret intelligence. With more than 854,000 people currently holding a TS clearance, has the defense and intelligence world grown too big, too fast? Or has this large growth served us well, exemplified by no successful terrorist acts on US soil since 9/11? How can we judge the success of these programs, when much of it will never be known by the general public?"

17 of 502 comments (clear)

  1. Hmm! by NeoThermic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Or has this large growth served us well, exemplified by no successful terrorist acts on US soil since 9/11?"

    The day after 9/11 I found a rock. I've kept this rock with me every day since then. Could it be more that this rock prevents terrorism?

    Will people ever learn that correlation does not imply causation?

    --
    Use my link above, or to view my server, NeoThermic.com
    1. Re:Hmm! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      i'll give you $30 for the rock.

    2. Re:Hmm! by captainpanic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let's see: There have been successful terrorist attacks around the world since 9/11. These attacks imply that terrorists are still active. Terrorists groups have re-asserted their ongoing desire to conduct similar attacks with in the US. Moreover, some such attempts have been made in the US but largely prevented. I'd say those might imply causation, douchebag.

      Funny that in Europe many people think its the redneck militaristic Americans who are the douchebags.

      There haven't been any successful terrorist attacks on Finland, Slovakia or Portugal either... and those countries can even be reached on foot from the terrorist hotspots. And they haven't severely reduced civil rights or increased their military expenses to a level that is unsustainable on the long term (although Portugal seems to have found ways to go bankrupt even without wasting money on an army).

    3. Re:Hmm! by Grygus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This was all also true for 10+ years before 9/11, when many of today's "security" measures were not in place. How does your theory account for this? Could it be that we already had successful prevention measures in place and they simply failed one time, with only small tweaks needed instead of a deeply rooted culture of fear and suspicion?

    4. Re:Hmm! by captainpanic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, after the fall of the Soviet Union, there were good security measures. The only thing missing at that time was a decent enemy.

      Luckily, we found a good enemy. We take it very serious. And by the looks of it, we cannot even defeat this one. It's the perfect excuse to continue spending tons of money on useless weapons and other security measures.

    5. Re:Hmm! by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Informative

      Funny that in Europe many people think its the redneck militaristic Americans who are the douchebags.

      At least we respect freedom of religion in this country and aren't busy passing legislation to infringe upon the practice of that freedom. Maybe you should take a look at your own backyard before you start throwing stones into mine?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    6. Re:Hmm! by denis-The-menace · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In Iran, rocks prevent adultery.

      --
      Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
    7. Re:Hmm! by edittard · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In Iran, rocks punish half of adulterers.

      FYFFY

      --
      At the bottom of the /. main page it says 'Yesterday's News'. Well they got that right.
    8. Re:Hmm! by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Preventing a Shinto temple at Pearl Harbor wouldn't be an infringement on the first Amendment

      Yes it would. Telling a religion that they can't build a house of worship in a specific city is most definitely an infringement on the 1st amendment.

      so long as it doesn't offend the families of the men and women who were murdered at Pearl Harbor

      Please point out the section of the US Constitution that says you have a right not to be offended.

      The freedom of religion does not include freedom to offend other people with your religion.

      Actually, yes, it does. I'm free to do whatever I want as long as it doesn't directly harm you. Offending you != harming you.

      I wish the court system would teach that lesson to the fruitcakes from that Westboro Baptist "church".

      The 1st amendment would protect their activities regardless of whether or not they were religious in nature. It's called free speech. Even jackasses have it.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  2. 854,000 people currently holding a TS clearance by mcgrew · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That number mey be exaggerated; it's possible it includes me, as I held a TS clearance in the USAF almost 40 years ago. It may even be likely. Just because a person holds a clearance doesn't mean they actually know anything, even with a clearance you're only briefed on a "need to know" basis. If it does include me, it includes anyone who was ever stationed at Utapao, Thailand during the Vietnam war, since some secret recon gear was there. It also likely includes anyone who was ever stationed at a SAC base.

    If this is so, 854k people doesn't seem quite so outrageous; it may sinply be the people still living who were investigated, cleared, and trained (you have to get training to get a TS clearance).

  3. The day after 9/11 you found a rock? by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Funny

    For most Americans, the day after 9/11 they found Iraq.

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:The day after 9/11 you found a rock? by OzPeter · · Score: 5, Informative

      For most Americans, the day after 9/11 they found Iraq.

      Which is sad revisionist history since that the US immediately invaded Afghanistan over 9/11 and only a long time later did they get around to invading Iraq.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    2. Re:The day after 9/11 you found a rock? by Zocalo · · Score: 5, Funny

      And many uniformed Americans have been stuck between Iraq and a hard place ever since.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  4. "No terrorist attacks since 9/11"? by Silverhammer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Or has this large growth served us well, exemplified by no successful terrorist acts on US soil since 9/11?

    There have been numerous terrorist attacks on US soil since 9/11, two successful (e.g., Fort Hood, Little Rock) and the rest foiled only by the attackers' own incompetence (e.g., Shoebomber, Pantybomber, Times Square).

  5. Re:United States Government Accountability Office? by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Worse, if the latest research (Warning: PDF research paper) on journalist standards at "credible" newspapers like Washington Post/NYT is any indication, we can't even trust anything that isn't secret to be reported correctly inside "Top Secret America". Sad, very sad, but at least the rapidly growing internet journalism is showing them up...

  6. Wha? by copponex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I shall point out to you that you wrote your post in English. No need to thank my country or my ancestors for that, you're welcome! Or perhaps you are of the sort that would prefer the world to speak German?

    Russia is probably owed as much for the defeat of the Nazis as the Americans.

    I shall also point out that Islam seeks power and money, and that I am not sure one would find either in any of the "countries" you listed.

    Islam seeks submission to God. That's what the word Islam means. People seek power and money. For instance, Saudi Arabia is a theocracy, but it's a US Ally, because it's leaders seek money and power. (Remember GW Bush holding hands with the Saudi Crown Prince?)

    If you wanted to knock terrorism into last century, you'd have to do two things: leave Iraq and Afghanistan, and form a new Manhattan style project to harvest energy directly to the sun to end our oil addiction. Of course, those things are nearly impossible for the US to do, since it only seeks power and money.

  7. Re:United States Government Accountability Office? by sjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Much of the anti-terrorist hysteria reminds me of the tiger repelling rock. The fact is that terrorist attacks were few and far between before 9/11 and probably would have remained so after. The tactics used on 9/11 didn't even remain effective for the entire duration of the attack simply due to the civilian response. Evidence suggests that it wouldn't have been effective at all but for the bad advice from our government that the first few plane's worth of passengers followed.

    Locks on cockpit doors make sense, and no longer telling civilians that passivity works make sense. The rest including the war on clean hair and proper hydration as well as the color coded chart telling us how terrified to be need to be scrapped.

    It's too bad all the airport security crap can't be re-purposed as medical scanners so we could address an actual problem (expensive healthcare) that actually causes people to die.

    Most of the stuff is marked top secret so they can severely punish anyone who points out that they're naked.