Slashdot Mirror


New Snowden Revelation: Terrorists Attempting To Infiltrate CIA

cold fjord writes "The Washington Post reports, 'The CIA found that among a subset of job seekers whose backgrounds raised questions, roughly one out of every five had "significant terrorist and/or hostile intelligence connections," according to the document, which was provided to The Washington Post by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden. The groups cited most often were Hamas, Hezbollah, and al-Qaeda and its affiliates, but the nature of the connections was not described in the document. So sharp is the fear of threats from within that last year the NSA planned to launch at least 4,000 probes of potentially suspicious or abnormal staff activity .... The anomalous behavior that sent up red flags could include staffers downloading multiple documents or accessing classified databases they do not normally use for their work, said two people familiar with the software used to monitor employee activity.'"

250 comments

  1. No need for that anymore... by Tim12s · · Score: 1, Troll

    No need for that anymore... guess he saved them alot of effort trying to get in.

    1. Re:No need for that anymore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Snowden didn't get everything. Particularly the documents created since he left--which could be a considerable amount of documents. The Federal Government "compartmentalizes" data and information--Snowden most likely only download some on one compartment. That is, his data theft is only the tip of the iceberg of total data.

    2. Re:No need for that anymore... by Frobnicator · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, they still need it. Just look at the nature of the story: "The official, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss classified material."

      Yet these people aren't being hunted across the globe for their classified leaks.

      --
      //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
    3. Re:No need for that anymore... by caballew · · Score: 2

      No, they still need it. Just look at the nature of the story: "The official, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss classified material."

      Yet these people aren't being hunted across the globe for their classified leaks.

      But this was probably an approved intentional Anonymous leak.

    4. Re:No need for that anymore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're not hunting these people? It must be nice living in your world where the only things that happen are what you can conceive of with your tunnel vision and your limited imagination.

      Sure, they aren't being hunted on Page One, but those same terrorist-linked spies also aren't going to the Guardian with their information, now are they? Most of these people are hunted down and dealt with quietly, and it takes a lot more to find people who aren't trumpeting their existence to the world press.

    5. Re:No need for that anymore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In which case, it shouldn't be reported.

    6. Re:No need for that anymore... by t4ng* · · Score: 4, Insightful

      All depends on your perspective. To people outside the US, the CIA is the most well funded and brutal terrorist organization in the world!

    7. Re:No need for that anymore... by Tim12s · · Score: 1

      Well... its all relative. Before the CIA brutality wasn't reserved only for the US. At this point, you just hope that the dog is on the leash on the right side of morality. In that shade of the world, its a very dark corner. Unfortunately they don't have a great track record.

      You know who else doesn't have a good track record?

      Everybody Else!

      Look... Its a good thing that they are becoming more accountable to their people. I don't see that happening of Mugabe or many other governments. I actually thing corruption - in general - is getting far far worse around the world.

    8. Re:No need for that anymore... by cavreader · · Score: 1

      How do you know the CIA is well funded? Do you have the yearly budget for all the other Foreign Intelligence organizations in the world to make a comparison? And it should be very clear by now that the US public and even some US governmental agencies do not give a shit about what those outside of the US think. It's also become a gigantic waste of time of money trying to play nice with others outside the US. People in the US continue to hear nothing but complaints, accusations, and personal insults that do not do anything except increase the level of animosity the average citizen feels to those outside their borders.

    9. Re:No need for that anymore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I am sure that CIA is as brutal as AQ, Chinese, most middle east and South American prisons. The only ones that think of them as being a brutal terrorist organization, would be AQ, Chinese spies, etc.

    10. Re:No need for that anymore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm British, and I'm old enough to have had arguments in my youth when foreigners - including Americans - castigated my country for its imperialism.

      Now, that was obviously a long time ago. (Although not as long as you're probably thinking.) But there's a part of me that's never stopped thinking - this is what it's like, guys, hope you're enjoying it as much as we did.

      The current - stagnation, I think is the best word - over Syria is a potent illustration of how empires fail. You do everything, and I mean everything, you can, in crisis after crisis. You send in diplomats, engineers, doctors, lawyers, soldiers, whatever you think will help - time after time after time. There's always another crisis. And no matter what happens, it seems you get no gratitude, nothing but blame. And sooner or later, you're just plain exhausted. Then your congress starts saying "No more, we're not paying for this adventure, we'll sit this one out". And pretty soon after that, their electors start saying "we don't have to intervene every time, who knew? Let's stop spending so much on the military."

      And before you know it, you're just another country, sitting around watching the news and bitching about how the Chinese won't stand up against atrocities.

    11. Re:No need for that anymore... by cold+fjord · · Score: 2, Informative

      I understand your viewpoint. If it makes you feel any better, the US has been accused of imperialism as well for a very long time regardless if it made sense or not. Vietnam was claimed to be imperialism, and probably Korea, as well as various actions in the Caribbean in the years before WW2.

      Part of what has undermined the British military is the growing burden of social spending. The same is starting to happen in the US. Many people in the US and around the world will cheer now, but eventually I think it is likely they might start to understand the drawbacks when a crisis comes and the US is truly impotent. Then it is likely to be a lot less fun.

      Cheers

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    12. Re:No need for that anymore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're assuming the reporter is privy to the knowledge that it's "intentional".

    13. Re:No need for that anymore... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Do you have the yearly budget for all the other Foreign Intelligence organizations in the world to make a comparison?

      You don't need that, in a lot of places you can look at a countries GDP and see that the entire country pulls in less money than the minimum that we know the CIA gets. Thus your money angle in stupid and we need to use known actions as a measure instead. Mossad overtly gets up to some audacious things on what has to be a much lower budget because their entire country has an income less than that spent on US intelligence.

    14. Re:No need for that anymore... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Didn't you get that they outsource torture to those middle east prisons you are complaining about? They even sent a few suspects to Syrian prisons.

    15. Re:No need for that anymore... by MikeBabcock · · Score: 2

      The USA has a black budget of $52 billion for 2013.

      There are 50 countries in the world with total national budgets of at least $52 billion, so only those could possibly compete (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government_budgets_by_country)

      Considering the UK spends just $4 billion on MI5 + MI6 https://www.mi5.gov.uk/home/about-us/who-we-are/funding.html ... I'd say the CIA is pretty 'well funded' in comparison.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    16. Re:No need for that anymore... by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 1

      The fact we usually know what Mossad has done doesn't speak well of their effectivness. You want your secret intelligence services to do things that remain secret.

      The other thing to remember is that by and large the CIA are spies. Mossad is notable because they kill a lot of people, but that's hardly what an intelligence agency is actually all about.

    17. Re:No need for that anymore... by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 1

      The $52 billion is the funding for every intelligence agency in the US, including operations costs for drones, satellites and numerous other things. That's not all CIA.

    18. Re:No need for that anymore... by findoutmoretoday · · Score: 1

      Syria is a potent illustration of how empires fail.

      Is it not one more Saudi success? America is just a potential mercenary force there.

    19. Re:No need for that anymore... by ubermiester · · Score: 1

      All depends on your perspective. To people outside the US, the CIA is the most well funded and brutal terrorist organization in the world!

      Riiiighht...

      Because the CIA regularly blows up markets full of people, poisons the drinking water in girls' schools, cuts journalists' heads off and posts a video of it online, etc, etc, etc, etc. Just because the CIA is feared does not mean it is a terrorist organization. The (over)use of the term "terrorism" to describe any kind of violence is the result of GWB's ridiculous use of the term "War on Terror". By declaring war on a tactic instead of an organization, he opened up the US to this kind of derision. Please do not fall into that trap because it does not reflect reality and only hurts the cause of peace because it foments exactly the kind of mistrust and fear that actual terrorists need to thrive. If you don't like drone strikes, propose an alternative and fight for it. Don't just take pot shots at the US's first line of defense against people who do actually want to kill indiscriminately so as to create terror in the general population.

    20. Re: No need for that anymore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As dependant as we are on cia/nsa inte, an op on the inside would far worse than any leak because they could taint legit Intel or plant corrupt Intel.

      anything Snowden released was irrelevant

    21. Re: No need for that anymore... by LinuxLuver · · Score: 1

      These are deliberate "leaks" because they know few people actually believe official statements. That's why no one is looking for these "lakers"

      --
      Only boring people are ever bored.
    22. Re:No need for that anymore... by romons · · Score: 1

      The US has been an empire in the americas for a while now, like over 100 years. It has been pretty successful at subjugating central and south america, with the occasional noisy exception. And, like any real empire, we've beat the shit out of large groups of people, overthrown governments we didn't like, and basically acted like an outrageous bully, with nobody to call us on.

      The current US foray into the middle east is due to the US being run for a while by a bunch of rich oil men, first with Bush 41, then again with Bush 43. We acted as their personal rentacops, opening up oil fields. Nothing more. There is really no strategic interest in the middle east that we can't buy at this point. War is just cheaper, at least for the oil guys.

      Since the end of the cold war, this whole 'world policeman' role is new to us. In fact, the US is very isolationist; we give almost nothing in aid to most countries (per capita), compared to, say, Sweden. Our presidents have had to lie us into every war we've become involved in, other than perhaps Korea. We could mostly care less when millions of people were slaughtered in places like Rwanda or Somalia. That is a job for the UN, right? That's what we pay them for (or don't pay them for).

      So, the Syria crisis, and middle east in general, has nothing to do with our 'empire'. It is an annoyance to the current president. He doesn't want either side to win, but he doesn't want to seem like a wimp. So, he'll fire a few cruise missiles, with congress' approval, and go back to ignoring the bloodshed, which is actually in the interests of the US; either side winning is bad for our buddies in the region, so we need to even the odds some. It doesn't hurt that Obama can thumb his nose at Russia and Iran at the same time.

      We aren't sending doctors, engineers, diplomats, or even well intentioned soldiers. We are sending supersonic robot bombs. Much cheaper, and as you say, it doesn't really matter what we do anyway.

      --
      Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company -- Mark Twain
    23. Re:No need for that anymore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Part of what has undermined the British military is the growing burden of social spending. The same is starting to happen in the US. Many people in the US and around the world will cheer now, but eventually I think it is likely they might start to understand the drawbacks when a crisis comes and the US is truly impotent. Then it is likely to be a lot less fun.

      The US spends so little on social spending that it is embarrassing. Also, if there is a reason for a war, it will be easy to whip up some excuse, and push it on Fox and NYTimes. Everybody in the US likes wars. It is even more fun than football.

      Given that the US spends more on 'defense' than the next 10 countries combined, and the US economy is dependent on this spending, I suspect that the US won't become 'impotent' for a while now.

    24. Re:No need for that anymore... by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      The US spends so little on social spending that it is embarrassing.

      I'm sorry, but you are very uninformed about US social spending if you believe that to be true.

      The US spends 2X on social spending at the federal level compared to the military. The states also have social spending, and little military spending.

      Federal Spending by the Numbers, 2013

      Actually no, people in the US don't like war.

      The US spends large amounts on defense because it pays its soldiers a competitive wage in a volunteer army since the 1970s. Most other nations with large militaries use conscription, and are less equipped that the US, and don't have to move forces like the US.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    25. Re:No need for that anymore... by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      If you have a funny name, you are suspected of being linked to a terrorist. Pretty soon, if you are Christian, Jesus will be off limits too. The saying, loose lips sink ships transplanted, means that security has more to lose from talkative (unable to keep a secret) people, than suspected infiltrators.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    26. Re: No need for that anymore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you really sure that your government is using its wide ranging anti-terror laws only against people that fit the narrow definition you provided?

    27. Re:No need for that anymore... by bhiestand · · Score: 1

      The US spends large amounts on defense because it pays its soldiers a competitive wage in a volunteer army since the 1970s. Most other nations with large militaries use conscription, and are less equipped that the US, and don't have to move forces like the US.

      Glad you brought this up, that's usually my job. It's not just the competitive wage, though, but also the larger compensation package (healthcare, retirement, etc.) that inflates the figures (depending on which figures people use).

      I would also argue that we're already seeing some impotency in Syria. The world has been watching a small atrocity unfold, millions of civilians displaced, chemical weapons used against civilians... and the US looks wary of responding with cruise missiles. I wonder if we will look back on it with regret, as many of us do with Rwanda?

      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
  2. Snowden beware by jodido · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they can make Snowden out to be a terrorist, or a supporter of terrorism, or someone who knew a terrorist, or knew someone who knew a terrorist, they will try to justify assassinating him.

    1. Re:Snowden beware by slashmydots · · Score: 1

      Labeling everything as "terrorist" like a girl that just got a new glittery labelmaker is more of a media and crowd control thing. If they try and label him a terrorist, zero US citizens are going to buy it so that would just cheapen the word. It's not worth the damage. They're just going to call what he did illegal and stick with that. They're also never going to get their hands on him.

    2. Re:Snowden beware by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 1

      ... that would just cheapen the word

      As if the US Gov't cares about cheapening the value of anything. The Constitution is regarded by at least one former President as "just a piece of paper" -- one that you use to wipe your ass with.

    3. Re:Snowden beware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      If the UK can use terrorist laws to detain Miranda, the US will not be far behind.

      At any rate, you don't need a drone to have people assassinated in Russia.

    4. Re:Snowden beware by Brett+Buck · · Score: 0

      Given that he has clearly and proudly violated the National Security Act, he is already liable for the death sentence.

    5. Re:Snowden beware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If they thought like you did, they wouldn't last long due to their evident idiocy. Shooting Snowden is the last thing the US is going to do. It would be horrible PR. Right now, people like him because he showed the people too dense to realize what was already happening that the obvious was actually happening, but just as many people think he's a traitor and the US government has a real grievance against him.

      Assassinating him might satisfy the most radical of that second group, but it would very quickly turn some of the erstwhile supporters of the government into opposition. And the government knows that. Only a complete incompetent would have him assassinated. I don't even know why you people seem to believe that this is even an actual option. Isn't him being pursued and exiled enough for it to satisfy your persecution complexes and flair for the dramatic?

    6. Re:Snowden beware by petteyg359 · · Score: 2

      Good: "use [it] to wipe your ass"
      Good: "wipe your ass with [it]"
      Bad: "use [it] to wipe your ass with [it]"

    7. Re:Snowden beware by PCM2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Given that he has clearly and proudly violated the National Security Act, he is already liable for the death sentence.

      No, he is not. There are various offenses under the National Security Act, and the ones of which Snowden is being accused are not eligible for the death penalty.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    8. Re:Snowden beware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Snowden: "You can't win, Darth Obama. If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine."

    9. Re:Snowden beware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go fuck yourself!
      You and everyone else who tries to defend an organization that clearly is hostile to it's own population are the greatest threat to the nation.
      As far as I am concerned you are the ones who are traitors.

    10. Re:Snowden beware by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

      the ones of which Snowden is being accused are not eligible for the death penalty.

      the ones of which Snowden is being accused are not eligible for the death penalty . . . yet

      . . . coming soon, to a secret court near you, "Snowden's Law"

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    11. Re:Snowden beware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If they thought like you did, they wouldn't last long due to their evident idiocy. Shooting Snowden is the last thing the US is going to do

      Oh, it will be the Russian Mafia that does it, probably in a shootout accidentally happening in his vicinity. That will prove how foolish it was of him to flee the free and secure U.S.A. where he could have expected a fair trial, for a country like Russia where bad things happen.

    12. Re:Snowden beware by number11 · · Score: 1

      Given that he has clearly and proudly violated the National Security Act, he is already liable for the death sentence.

      No, he is not. There are various offenses under the National Security Act, and the ones of which Snowden is being accused are not eligible for the death penalty.

      Not officially, no. And we know how scrupulously the various government agencies obey the law.

    13. Re: Snowden beware by bugnuts · · Score: 2

      That's actually why he identified himself -- to help avoid assassination.

    14. Re:Snowden beware by number11 · · Score: 1

      If they thought like you did, they wouldn't last long due to their evident idiocy. Shooting Snowden is the last thing the US is going to do. It would be horrible PR.

      True.

      But if they don't catch the gunman, who's to say who did it? You're right, the CIA would probably be blamed, and it would be horrible PR for the US. Good thing there aren't any countries that would like to bring the US horrible PR.

      But if the CIA wanted to avoid horrible PR, shooting probably wouldn't be a good choice, it looks so intentional. After all, a lot of people die in auto and pedestrian accidents, and judging from dashcam youtube videos, Russian highways are a madhouse anyhow. Or sometimes they just get sick, and die in spite of the efforts of doctors to save them. Or drink too much and fall off balconies. Get lost and have an accident while camping. It's scary really, the variety of things that can befall even the most careful person.

    15. Re:Snowden beware by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      At any rate, you don't need a drone to have people assassinated in Russia.

      Anonymous or not, this should be marked insightful. Unless maybe they left off the journalist or newsworthy person who promotes democracy part.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    16. Re:Snowden beware by Guru80 · · Score: 2

      If you aren't going to keep abreast of current affairs and the charges of which they are bringing against him it might be best to not talk about said subject.

    17. Re: Snowden beware by myowntrueself · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's actually why he identified himself -- to help avoid assassination.

      And he has some security in the form of encrypted documents scattered around the world with instructions to release the key should anything 'happen' to him. And these documents contain stuff that would be VERY damaging to the US government.

      So, naturally, the US doesn't want to assassinate him. But the US has many enemies who would like to see these documents released. Do the math.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    18. Re:Snowden beware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They do this all the time. Witness how the Boston bombers used "weapons of mass destruction." If something the strength of a pressure cooker bomb is WMD then there would have been plenty of WMDs in Iraq.

    19. Re:Snowden beware by Deluvianvortex · · Score: 1

      So you're saying you agree with striking syria?

    20. Re:Snowden beware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not about putting a terrorist label on Snowden. It's about putting a terrorist label on anyone doing anything remotely suspicious within government organisations. A way of hindering people to collect evidence and blowing the whistle on illegal government actions.

      Secondly it's about making out Snowden as a terrorist helper, someone who helps people infiltrating sensitive us government agencies and programs. Making him enemy of the state.

    21. Re:Snowden beware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Newsflash: NSA shutdown after being deemed a haven for terrorists.

    22. Re:Snowden beware by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Uhhhh...forget about the USA getting the UK to blow millions going after Assange and keeping him locked in that embassy like a caged animal? You seem to be under the mistaken belief the US gov gives a flying fuck WHAT you think, when IRL nothing could be further from the truth. In reality the US gov is trying to rip off the mob with the whole "lets make an example out of him" bit and they don't give a fuck what you think as they have the MSM being their very own Baghdad Bob to hand wave it all away.

      For those that believe the US gov is still the "good guys", or ever were for that matter, I present exhibit A and exhibit B. First exhibit A, a speech by Naomi Wolf outlining how many plays from the "dictator's handbook" that goes back to Lenin to El Duce to the Crazy Austrian are being used here and now and this was made in 2007, things are MUCH worse than when this was made. oh as an aside she is now on the watchlist, her crime? talking about what rights you have under the constitution....Hear that sound? That is the sound of the founding fathers spinning like tops in their graves.

      Exhibit B was made nearly a century ago, but read this speech and see how much it sounds like exactly what we are seeing now....

      "I helped make Mexico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested."

      Sound familiar? The only thing that has changed is which country is getting fucked and which corp gets rich off the blood of the soldiers. hell you have a government that ADMITS that Gulf Of Tonkin was a "non event" (read total false flag) yet not a single person gets arrested? hell the current AG with Fast & Furious tried to pull a false flag on the American people and got Americans and Mexicans alike killed and has been caught in repeated lies under oath...yet nobody even entertains the thought of hauling his ass to jail?

      If it looks like it, acts like it, and smells like it maybe we should call it what it is...fascism. The only difference between the fascism of today and the fascism preached by the crazy Austrian is that the Austrian forced the corps to bend to his will, in this new version the corps and the government are one. Please watch the Wolf video and see how many plays from the dictator playbook is being run here now, a place outside the rule of law where torture takes place, public humiliation of citizens for the purpose of instilling fear and obedience, a government that spies upon its own people as much if not more than it spies on others, I could go on but Ms Wolf says it much better than I do.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    23. Re:Snowden beware by cool_arrow · · Score: 1

      Oh they'll buy it. These are the same people that elected obama, bush, etc etc

    24. Re:Snowden beware by dbIII · · Score: 1

      The USA gets plenty of horrible PR so the above conspiracy theory has no motive.

    25. Re: Snowden beware by dbIII · · Score: 1

      But the US has many enemies who would like to see these documents released. Do the math.

      It turns out the NSA and others are outsourced shambolic things with plenty of points of contact where "many enemies" could apply hookers and blow to get those documents themselves - do the math - they probably already have many they want and are not interested in a random dump that everyone else gets to before they can take advantage of them.

    26. Re:Snowden beware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The USA gets plenty of horrible PR so the above conspiracy theory has no motive.

      Which one? That some other country would try to make the US PR even worse? Or that the US would whack him and try to make it look like an accident?

      I'm not sure that either qualifies as a "conspiracy theory", unless you are claiming that activities by national intelligence organizations are conspiracies. Which I guess is true in a sense, the same sense that every corporate action that tries to avoid attribution is a conspiracy.

    27. Re:Snowden beware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cynical partisan statement. When the game is rigged via psychological and literal (only 2, maaaaybe 3 choices for president) trappings your statement degrades humanity as a whole well beyond what is deserved. Level the playing field for everyone and then we'll talk :P

    28. Re:Snowden beware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its creepy what people are able AND willing to sell... grow some compassion with that "self-respect"

    29. Re:Snowden beware by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      " If they try and label him a terrorist, zero US citizens are going to buy it so that would just cheapen the word."

      Not according to the talking heads on all the news channels. Considering how many people hate Bradley Manning and Julian Assange, an awful lot of people will trust the government's word yet again.

    30. Re: Snowden beware by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      Also, those "life insurance" documents are certainly with people trusted by Snowden.

      Which means that they must be very close friends, with whom he certainly interacted a lot. Which means that with a little bit of detective work, the NSA would have not trouble finding out who they are.

    31. Re:Snowden beware by twosat · · Score: 1

      There are a few more lines at the end of that quote...

      "During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents" http://www.wanttoknow.info/warisaracket

    32. Re:Snowden beware by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      Actually the entire speech is about 3 pages long so I wasn't sure where to cut it off at, but you are right that I probably should have included that line.

      With or without the line it still illustrates that what we are seeing here today is NOT a new thing, it wasn't caused by a POTUS with a D or an R by his name, its just one sign of a completely corrupted system that frankly has been broken for a good century or more, since the days of cobblestone roads and bolt action rifles. the only difference between then and now is that those in power have gotten so damned arrogant and spoiled thanks to the insane amounts of money they have been able to steal that they just don't give enough of a fuck to even pretend anymore.

      Personally I'm shocked it hasn't devolved to the point that the POTUS and congress critters wear badges with the corp logo of those that own them, like a NASCAR driver just covered in patches for this or that product.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    33. Re:Snowden beware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not officially, no. And we know how scrupulously the various government agencies obey the law.

      Come now, what they are doing is perfectly legal....

      Laws:
      1. Gov't can do anything as long as it has oversight.
      2. Gov't can be the oversight.
      3. Gov't laws and oversight, including the above can be secret.

      Nothing to see here, go to sleep citizens.

    34. Re:Snowden beware by ubermiester · · Score: 1

      Finding instances of bad behavior does not make the case that an entire nation over it's entire history has been a "bad guy" instead of a "good guy". Such a simplistic view makes you sound even more naive than the straw man you've set up.

      It is the success of the US culture of individualism and free speech that is the foundation for it's "good guy" status - which was duly earned. Your Chomsky wannabe take on things ignores this fact in the hope of...well, what exactly? Are you suggesting that there is another superpower with a better record of human rights that the US should emulate? Ancient Rome? Medieval Spain? Elizabethan England? Prussia? Soviet Russia?

      Being better than others does not of course excuse bad behavior, but please do not cherry-pick mistakes in judgement and ignore everything else. It is exactly the kind of simplistic view that sends people into a jingoistic frenzy.

    35. Re: Snowden beware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In all honesty, that makes ME want to assassinate him. I wanna know what's in there!

    36. Re:Snowden beware by booch · · Score: 1

      I'd point out that the US Constitution (article 1, section 9) forbids ex post facto laws -- but it's pretty clear that the Constitution is not really being followed in this case.

      --
      Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
    37. Re: Snowden beware by Anti-Social+Network · · Score: 1

      Knowing who and being able to do anything about it, are two very different things. I'll bet Julian Assange has a copy. The US is STILL trying to get him from when he pissed them off last time. Thing is, though, if Snowden bites the dust, this means lots of very bad things happening to operations that are legitimately trying to keep serious threats at bay - gun runners, cartel agents, that kind of thing. You know, the scum the NSA and such should really be keeping tabs on. This means the upper tier in US administration may want to take a hard look at an amnesty deal. Bring Snowden back to safety with guarantee of immunity and that info stays as safe as it (and US domestic law enforcement entrusted with his safety as a citizen) can make it. He'll never be able to work again either way, I imagine.

      --
      Goddammit just when I get my first +5 the Beta rolls out and kills everything
    38. Re: Snowden beware by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Good point about Assange. But there's probably multiple copies encoded in such a way that no single person can trigger early publishing, which means that we're probably looking at about a dozen people having some. Do you really think there's a dozen persons out of the reach of NSA, and trusted enough by Snowden?

  3. Paranoia... by Meditato · · Score: 5, Interesting

    or actual infiltration?

    The original Bin Laden al-Qaeda is practically non-existent, its Islamist affiliates are too busy trying to win over regimes in the mideast, Hamas is trying not to piss off the US considering that Obama has been much more pro-Palestinian. Hezbollah....maybe. We're talking about a few tens of thousands of eligible individuals here, most of them with Hezbollah and Hamas.

    I have serious doubts that this is anything other than the Three Letter agencies trying to project a Cold War interpretation ("big centralized nation-state entity out to get us") onto a set of data that only shows small, disparate groups who are all actually too busy trying to avoid being smashed by the US, Israel, or the Arab League.

    1. Re:Paranoia... by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2, Interesting

      On one hand, your typical AQ member is probably dumb enough to try to get hired at the CIA...on the other, the CIA is probably dumb enough to think that anyone from a certain region of the middle east is a terrorist even if they are just as closely connected to Kevin Bacon...hey, they blow people up with drones for the same.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    2. Re:Paranoia... by broken_chaos · · Score: 1

      Why would it be at all surprising to anyone that various foreign groups (I wouldn't even say 'enemies', as that's too specific) would be trying to infiltrate an intelligence agency that operates internationally? The CIA isn't domestic spies, after all -- it makes perfect sense that everyone else's non-domestic spies would work to figure out what you know about them (and maybe get some information about other countries as a bonus!).

      It's not the Cold War, no. But the very existence of the CIA is enough to warrant attempts at infiltration -- their entire purpose is to spy abroad, so why would it be surprising that others are doing so?

    3. Re:Paranoia... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 3, Interesting

      From TFA:

      roughly one out of every five had âoesignificant terrorist and/or hostile intelligence connections,â

      I would guess that the definition of "signficant...connections" is in this case.

      Maybe it means you work for Hamas. Or maybe it means one of your cousins knew a guy in college whose little brother is now a member of hamas....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re:Paranoia... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Paranoia. Ie, "subset" of applicants who raised suspicions. 1 in 5 of those already single out for more scrutiny had a link to things related to terrorist groups. But applicants ultimately tied to terrorist networks were "small".

      Is this a surprise to anyone? A small number of people with terrorist connections tried to apply for a job at the CIA. OMG! Isn't this why there's a complicated and extensive application process already in place?

    5. Re:Paranoia... by sjames · · Score: 1

      I suspect it's self fulfillment. They think the terrorists are everywhere so anything looking odd to them is assumed to be a terrorist. And so their analysis confirms terrorists are everywhere, and applying for jobs with the CIA.

    6. Re:Paranoia... by sjames · · Score: 2

      We do know they believe in the three hop theory.

    7. Re:Paranoia... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Informative

      Paranoia... or actual infiltration?

      Or maybe just a bunch of hype.

      First thing that jumps out is the 4,000 re-investigations. According wikipedia it is estimated that the NSA has over 30,000 employees. I am going to pull some numbers out of my ass here: Let's say 25% have secret clearances and another 50% have top-secret(TS) clearances and the remaining 25% are support staff that don't need clearances. Secret clearances get re-investigated every 10 years, TS gets re-investigated every 5 years. It does not matter what TLA you work for that is standard. So (30K * 0.25 / 10) + (30K * 0.50 / 5) = 4500 re-investigations per year.

      That makes 4,000 re-investigations per year on the low side of completely unremarkable.

      Second thing is the wording quoted from the unnamed official:

      "Over the last several years, a small subset of CIA's total job applicants were flagged due to various problems or issues," one official said in response to questions. "During this period, one in five of that small subset were found to have significant connections to hostile intelligence services and or terrorist groups."

      Get that? 1 out of 5 of some unknown small subset. So we have absolutely no idea of the scale at all. It could be just 1 guy. Plus he lumped in "terrorist groups" with "hostile intelligence services" (which is basically all of them). So for all we know there were ZERO terrorists trying to infiltrate the NSA.

      Given the 'facts' in the article there is no story here.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    8. Re:Paranoia... by Cassini2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's not how the middle-east guys work. The CIA needs Arab spies to spy on the middle east baddies (and their is a very long list including Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran, etc.) After a while, the baddies work out who is working for the CIA, and then determine who the spies family is. Then the spy either becomes a double, or the family killed. This is a huge problem for the CIA.

      This problem is also why America has made such poor progress in Afghanistan. The Taliban will wipe out your family. On the other hand, American soldiers don't go after peoples families, and mostly follow a reasonable moral code. Thus, middle-eastern students in North America look over their shoulders, because they don't know who will go after their family back home. Can you imagine convincing people to fight when they don't know who will threaten their families?

    9. Re:Paranoia... by jrumney · · Score: 1

      What would surprise me more than finding that these organizations are trying to infiltrate the CIA would be to discover that the CIA is not actively trying to recruit them.

    10. Re:Paranoia... by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Maybe it means you work for Hamas. Or maybe it means one of your cousins knew a guy in college whose little brother is now a member of hamas....

      Or you gave money to a charity once that ended up funneled to Hamas.

    11. Re:Paranoia... by cold+fjord · · Score: 0

      Since the 4,000 investigations are related to incidents I rather doubt that they are part of the usual cycle of reinvestigation. I doubt people are scheduling their breach of security protocols to coincide with their 5 year reinvestigation.

      In 2009 the CIA reported received between 90,000 to 180,000 resumes. I think there might more than 0 people associated in some way with terrorist groups that applied, especially since there have been double agents identified in the past. Since there were multiple terrorist groups mentioned, as well as foreign intelligence agencies, I think it is a safe bet that at least one person from each applied. What do you think?

      I'm going to go with the story and assess your analysis as flawed. (Or at the very least your numbers as tainted, given their provenance.)

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    12. Re:Paranoia... by Yvanhoe · · Score: 2

      My guess is that they have a hard time finding people who speak Arabic and support Israel as much as the US government would want them to.

      Considering the failry lax criterion to label someone a terrorist, I am not surprised that a lot of their potential hires had "connections" to terrorists.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    13. Re:Paranoia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or actual infiltration?

      Let's assume that Arab terrorists with the intent of abolishing the American constitution and terrorizing the American public were "infiltrating" the CIA/NSA/FBI. Would they need to do anything different from what their job description demands in order to achieve their goals?

    14. Re:Paranoia... by Pav · · Score: 1

      How can we even talk about islamists wanting to infiltrate the CIA. I remember in a happier time learning how the primitives of previous ages spoke of crusades and jihads... and at religious school too. This is soooo orthagonal to any real problem the US has.

      The US warhawks and the bugeyed islamists seem to justify eachothers existence, like an arch - holding eachother up... allies in a strange and disturbing way. Terrorists are piddling pathetic creatures who in no real way threaten a nation state... they only hope to succeed by getting popular support. Radical islamists largely had lost support across the middle east by the 90's... hell... in Algeria the government actually infiltrated and HELPED them because the counterproductive violent action was starving them of what little popular support they had left. I have friends who, during the 90's, trekked through Afghanistan and other countries now largely off limits to westeners. Sept 11 was a last ditched strategy, and it backfired, yes BACKFIRED, at first. Sit and process that for a moment. They were looking for support from home, but the islamic world rose as one and sympathised with the USA on a gut level because the islamists had attacked islamic populations with the same violence for 10 years previously (to "wake them up" or other such nonsense). The USA not only missed a golden opportunity to become closer to the islamic world, but UTTERLY F*CKED EVERYTHING UP... soooo screwed the pooch that all of a sudden radical and violent islam is not at deaths door, but a real and vital force like it could NEVER have been without GW's support, and those of his successor.

      This CIA fluff is a non-issue. The continuing utter lack of human understanding will waste more treasure, lives and effort, and this HR issue is the least of it. It has even reached the stage where large numbers of people worldwide, even inside the USA, are offside..

    15. Re:Paranoia... by Meditato · · Score: 1

      If you think the US government is willfully in bed with terrorists, then you're completely delusional.

      Looking at your post history, it appears that your view on Foreign Policy is much the same Cold War-projected claptrap as makes our intelligence agencies so incompetent.

      Never ascribe to malice what can be ascribed to stupidity.

    16. Re:Paranoia... by quantaman · · Score: 1

      or actual infiltration?

      The original Bin Laden al-Qaeda is practically non-existent, its Islamist affiliates are too busy trying to win over regimes in the mideast, Hamas is trying not to piss off the US considering that Obama has been much more pro-Palestinian. Hezbollah....maybe. We're talking about a few tens of thousands of eligible individuals here, most of them with Hezbollah and Hamas.

      I have serious doubts that this is anything other than the Three Letter agencies trying to project a Cold War interpretation ("big centralized nation-state entity out to get us") onto a set of data that only shows small, disparate groups who are all actually too busy trying to avoid being smashed by the US, Israel, or the Arab League.

      I doubt there's much in the way of deliberate infiltration.

      The NSA isn't just a bunch of mathematicians, crackers, and sysadmins, they need a ton of people who can understand and contextualize the intelligence they receive. I'd expect the NSA to actively recruit from the same pool as their targets, it's inevitable that a few of those potential hires will turn out to be too close for comfort.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    17. Re:Paranoia... by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 0

      Thanks, but I think you are well behind the eight ball - so far behind you unfortunately cannot understand the truth when you hear it. In fact, the disinformation (see the excellent: http://www.amazon.com/Disinformation-Undermining-Attacking-Promoting-Terrorism/dp/1936488604) is designed to keep smart people like you from asking the right questions.

      How about you check out Barry Rubin's analysis? or Stephen Coughlin? or Frank Gaffney? or Robert Spencer? My statements merely reflect the information these giants are saying. These are all people who worked as intelligence analysts for Pentagon (Coughlin and Rubin), or as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence (Gaffney), or gave hundreds of briefings to the FBI and CIA for training (Spencer). Of course you are intimitely familiar with these names and their work, yes? if not, then perhaps you know a lot less than you think you do (since there is so much to know on the subject).

      Perhaps, you actually know virtually nothing about the global jihad and the international Leftist alliance that is helping them. As long as the disinformation keeps you from asking the right questions you will never get the right answers - and never recognize when a person is telling you the deep truth. Too bad - the world is an unpredictable place full for random violence until you find out what is going on (not aliens, no lizardmen, no illuminati - just good old fashioned International Socialist and Islamic ideologies working together to subvert the Free World).

      Never ascribe to malice what can be ascribed to stupidity.

      FYI the original quote uses the word, "incompetence". However, if you ascribe to incompetence what is actually malicious then you are going to be in a progressive world of hurt, aren't you? Look, you don't have to believe me, just follow some of the references I've given in my earlier posts. Without looking at those references you have no idea as to whether my statements are based on fact or not, yes? Use the scientific method, use my references and find the truth about geopolitics. Or not - if you would like to never see outside the disinformation that cages you. If you want to know the answers as to why Britain's immigration policy was the way it is, why Europeans will be a minority in their own countries within a few generations, why Obama and Bill Clinton used the US to fly as "Al Qaeda's Air Force" in Libya, Kosovo, Bosnia and soon in Syria, as well as Obama supporting the Muslim Brotherhood against the massively popular secular democratic movement in Egypt then I'll be happy to point you to best objective analyzes there are. Until then, please admit to yourself you actually know very little about the subject. Thanks for posting your ideas though.

  4. You know spies.... by Roskolnikov · · Score: 5, Funny

    Bunch of bitchy little girls. Good news for you, I'm a drunk and a washout already, so I can talk to whoever I want, burned or no.

    - Sam Axe

    --
    Unix, an obscure operating system developed by bored researchers in an attempt to get a better game playing experience.
  5. You can't win in this job market by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 4, Funny

    They won't hire you if you don't have job experience, and they won't hire you if you do.

  6. Snowden = superhuman? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, all the terror networks - you, know these horrible, horrible, fanatical, devoted, well-trained, well-funded nigh unstoppable guys against only America's best of the best of the best stand a chance to defend us - failed, the Russian, Chinese, Iranian professional spies failed; but Snowden got in all easy peasy. Yeah right.
    I bet US's enemies regularly send over total idiots to get caught so the real moles get to work without being bothered.

    Or Snowden really is a bona fida natural born super spy, who knows.

    1. Re: Snowden = superhuman? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was that a MIB reference?

    2. Re:Snowden = superhuman? by cgt · · Score: 1

      He probably didn't join with the intention of blowing whistles.

    3. Re:Snowden = superhuman? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Yes its an interesting plot. You have Soviet and Russian computer skills haunting the NSA networks for years - yet no huge US/Russian spy rings are exposed.
      Parts of the US press is going with the Russian talking point of a loss to the US and more funding/contractors needed to fix everything.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  7. This is news? by goodmanj · · Score: 0

    Well duh.

    1. Re:This is news? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You should have made it sarcastically humorous.

      "Our enemies trying to infiltrate our spy agencies?? I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you!!!"

  8. Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress by leftover · · Score: 2

    I think it would be an obvious move to have the NSA monitor "our" Congress-critters. Add their staffers, all the top people in the political parties, consulting companies and lobbyists. This is a manageable target size, all composed of people who presume to control public resources.
    As a group these people have caused more damage than all terrorists put together.

    --
    Bent, folded, spindled, and mutilated.
    1. Re:Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress by wbr1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If they do, do you think it would be used for the people? No, it would be used as leverage to further their own agenda by pulling the congress critter's strings.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    2. Re:Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress by Roskolnikov · · Score: 2

      heh, with their 3 degree's rule I suspect they already are... I wonder how they keep their own names off the lists, or if they even bother, very likely they create alter egos and live their real lives through them.

      --
      Unix, an obscure operating system developed by bored researchers in an attempt to get a better game playing experience.
    3. Re:Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      They already do this...but not for any altruistic purpose.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    4. Re:Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it would be an obvious move to have the NSA monitor "our" Congress-critters.

      Why? FBI has been doing that since the days of J. Edgar Hoover and what good has that done this country? The "intelligence community" just gets bigger, more powerful, and destroys more lives.

      Over the last century the US has financed and trained many of the groups that came back to haunt us later.

      "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist." -- Dwight D. Eisenhower

      That warning has perhaps more depth then might be ovious at first.

    5. Re:Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      I think it would be an obvious move to have the NSA monitor "our" Congress-critters.

      Why? FBI has been doing that since the days of J. Edgar Hoover and what good has that done this country?

      Old J. Edgar held it too close to the vest - make the info public and the NSA would be doing the country a real service.

    6. Re:Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it would be an obvious move to have the NSA monitor "our" Congress-critters.

      Why? FBI has been doing that since the days of J. Edgar Hoover and what good has that done this country?

      Old J. Edgar held it too close to the vest - make the info public and the NSA would be doing the country a real service.

      And therein lies the problem. Telling the truth angers the powerful and wealthy while keeping their secrets can make those holding them "close to the vest" power and wealth. Either way someone could end up dead if not sufficiently careful. Sure, J. Edgar Hoover kept secrets, when it was to his advantage and he took death threats head on and in person. He made himself feared by many and not just for the information he held. He could be quite flamboyant in his actions or get them done quietly as suited his needs. Compared to the CIA though, the FBI was not near as frightening except for the fact that at least by law, the CIA was forbidden, for most of its time, from clandestine activities within US territories.

    7. Re:Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They already did this when they "accidentally" tapped the entire 202 area code (Washington D.C.) instead of the national code 20 for Egypt. They probably have all sorts of juicy blackmail material to keep congress voting pro-NSA.

    8. Re:Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      If they do, do you think it would be used for the people? No, it would be used as leverage to further their own agenda by pulling the congress critter's strings./quote. Not that far-fetched, after all, it happened that way in Luxembourg...

    9. Re:Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Errr, best listen to Russ Tice - Tice made the shocking allegations that the NSA is specifically targeting Congressmen, Supreme Court Justices, and that the NSA has targeted and wire-tapped President Obama while he was campaigning prior to being elected!

      Lets say your plan was to happen - is the NSA and its leadership going to use that information to help the citizens or help themselves?

    10. Re:Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress by booch · · Score: 1

      If the NSA can monitor anyone (which Snowden claims, and which appears to be true) then there's likely some monitoring of Congress going on. Sad that Congress itself doesn't seem to realize this. (Or at least not those either profiting in some way from the NSA or being blackmailed by the NSA.)

      --
      Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
  9. The terrorists are already here. by bmo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Look at who signed this.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/experts-obama-here-what-do-syria_751267.html

    The same old bunch of neocon bastards that lied us into Iraq as far back as the "Open Letter to Bill Clinton back in 1998.

    http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
    http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

    And really, read the rest of the PNAC site.

    PNAC morphed into the Foreign Policy Initiative

    http://www.foreignpolicyi.org/about/staff
    http://www.foreignpolicyi.org/about

    Even during Mitt Romney's candidacy Mittens had a fucking wb page *titled* "new american century* with much of the above philosophy basically cut-and-pasted. Which shouldn't be surprising since his foreign policy "brain trust" consisted of FPI bastards. Up to and including Dan Senor (FPI and PNAC alum) on Meet The Press saying that we should bomb Iran back then.

    Read. It's not conspiracy theory when it's from their own mouths.

    I wouldn't put it past these bastards to hire someone to detonate a sarin bomb in Damascus to gin up an excuse for an invasion. And now they're wondering what the fuck to do now that the President just said "Well, we should have Congress' input on this."

    Fuck these guys for wanting to get us involved in another war where there is no winning, just more death.

    --
    BMO

    1. Re:The terrorists are already here. by caballew · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I wouldn't put it past these bastards to hire someone to detonate a sarin bomb in Damascus to gin up an excuse for an invasion. And now they're wondering what the fuck to do now that the President just said "Well, we should have Congress' input on this."

      Looking at his actual record, Obama is more George Bush that George Bush was . He's owned and controlled by the same people who own and control Congress. I'll give you a hint; it's not the American people. I wouldn't be surprised if the sarin wasn't released to benefit and promote our political agenda at home (NSA, etc.) as well as our foreign policy. He just wants it all wrapped up nicely with Congressional approval to deflect responsibility.

    2. Re:The terrorists are already here. by bmo · · Score: 2

      Indeed.

      But they really were caught off guard this weekend. He didn't follow the script like his advisors thought he should. Whether this really matters remains to be seen.

      --
      BMO

    3. Re:The terrorists are already here. by MRe_nl · · Score: 2

      There's really no need to hire someone in Damascus.
      Just send the chemicals from the CIA to the Saudi Mukhabarat, they'll pass it on to Al Nusra or an like-minded affiliate and BOOM there's your red line.

      --
      "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
    4. Re:The terrorists are already here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...He just wants it all wrapped up nicely with Congressional approval to deflect responsibility.

      Or, you know, he's aware of the law that requires Congress to approve any war. Just because Bush flouted it doesn't mean every president gets to do that with impunity. Though, so far Obama has done just that with every other inconvenient law, so maybe you're right after all.

    5. Re:The terrorists are already here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like they say, "when the President does it, it's not illegal". And when President Obama does it, you're a racist.

    6. Re:The terrorists are already here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who doesn't follow the news, what are you referring to?

    7. Re:The terrorists are already here. by betterprimate · · Score: 1

      And then there's this... Politicians enraged that Britain gave export licenses to sell Syria 'nerve gas chemicals'

      The rebels in Syria have been covertly funded by U.S. and NATO for the past four years via Turkey, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. So, no, I wouldn't put it past them either.

      Sigh.

      It's really disheartening when you know so much yet so little about geopolitics that you're able to predict the next move from the Elites. Just like Bush, Sr. said, "I don't need to read the news, I already know what's going to happen."

    8. Re:The terrorists are already here. by betterprimate · · Score: 1

      "Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey have received covert support from Washington in the funneling of arms to the most virulent Islamist elements of the rebel movement, while Russia and Iran have supplied arms to Assad." -- http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/may/13/1

      "In May 2007, a presidential finding revealed that Bush had authorised CIA operations against Iran. Anti-Syria operations were also in full swing around this time as part of this covert programme, according to Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker. A range of US government and intelligence sources told him that the Bush administration had "cooperated with Saudi Arabia's government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations" intended to weaken the Shi'ite Hezbollah in Lebanon. "The US has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria," wrote Hersh, "a byproduct" of which is "the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups" hostile to the United States and "sympathetic to al-Qaeda." He noted that "the Saudi government, with Washington's approval, would provide funds and logistical aid to weaken the government of President Bashir Assad, of Syria," with a view to pressure him to be "more conciliatory and open to negotiations" with Israel. One faction receiving covert US "political and financial support" through the Saudis was the exiled Syrian Muslim Brotherhood.

      According to former French foreign minister Roland Dumas, Britain had planned covert action in Syria as early as 2009: "I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business", he told French television:

      "I met with top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria. This was in Britain not in America. Britain was preparing gunmen to invade Syria."" -- http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/aug/30/syria-chemical-attack-war-intervention-oil-gas-energy-pipelines

      "Politicians enraged that Britain gave export licenses to sell Syria 'nerve gas chemicals'" -- http://rt.com/news/britain-sold-nerve-chemicals-283/

    9. Re:The terrorists are already here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Like they say, "when the President does it, it's not illegal"

      Aside from Richard Nixon, no one says that. Things didnt go so well for him. Also, he's dead, so there's that.

    10. Re:The terrorists are already here. by number11 · · Score: 1

      There's really no need to hire someone in Damascus.
      Just send the chemicals from the CIA to the Saudi Mukhabarat, they'll pass it on to Al Nusra or an like-minded affiliate and BOOM there's your red line.

      And there are stories already, where some rebels tell an AP reporter that their guys were just transporting/storing the shit for another group, and didn't know what it was, and there was this accident, and a bunch of their guys got killed.

      Could even be true. Of course, it could be a cover story for a rebel gas attack intended to be blamed on the government ("we didn't do it on purpose!"), or one rebel group setting another up to take the fall, or it could be Syrian government disinformation (Russian news sources are carrying this story), or it could just be another rumor in the fog of war.

      Meanwhile, Obama says the US has proof it came from the Syrian government, of course the details are secret, but he wouldn't lie to us.

      You can't trust anybody to be telling the truth in situations like this. Everyone may be lying.

    11. Re:The terrorists are already here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      shit i hadnt thought of that. i think we can guarantee that they have created scenarios of such, with the only downsides described being "negative public reaction if found out" or "doesnt quite galvanize public opinion despite our best efforts", and no mention of "moral reprehensability", "murderous", "satanic", "unconstitutional", "war crimes committed by us".

    12. Re:The terrorists are already here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are the dual-citizen Israelis who run US foreign policy through AIPAC, JINSA and other groups.

      Their policy so to get US to have the same enemies as Israel and for US to fight wars for them.

    13. Re:The terrorists are already here. by caballew · · Score: 2

      I would never had guessed at any time during my first 50 years that I would have thought that the U.S. government would become the Bad Guys that the last three years have proven it to be. And what's worse, I now believe the whole process is so corrupt that our government has passed the point of no return. Congress is so corrupt that they have made their corruption legal and no longer answer to the American people who either don't care or are too stupid to realize what's going on. Maybe it's always been an illusion.

    14. Re:The terrorists are already here. by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      [Obama] just wants it all wrapped up nicely with Congressional approval to deflect responsibility.

      Well, that's where O and W differ. W wouldn't have thought that far ahead -- or if he had, he would have assumed that "responsibility" would be a non-issue, because the only thing he'd need to worry about after the glorious victory would be where to put all the flowers sent to him by the thankful Syrians.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    15. Re:The terrorists are already here. by tramp · · Score: 1

      Welcome to reality. USA: the land of the great bastards also called U.S. government.

    16. Re:The terrorists are already here. by caballew · · Score: 2

      Well, that's where O and W differ. W wouldn't have thought that far ahead -- or if he had, he would have assumed that "responsibility" would be a non-issue, because the only thing he'd need to worry about after the glorious victory would be where to put all the flowers sent to him by the thankful Syrians.

      Obama has done plenty without explicit public Congressional approval:
      Waged war on Libya without congressional approval.
      Secretly deployed US special forces to 75 countries.
      Continued Bush's rendition program.
      Escalated the CIA drone war in Pakistan.
      Started a covert, drone war in Yemen.
      Initiated, and personally oversees a 'Secret Kill List'.
      Launched 20,000 Airstrikes in his first term.
      Obama signed executive order giving himself control of all communication systems in America
      Obama signs Executive Order allowing for control over all US resources

      Items with the consent of Congress:
      Signed the NDAA into law - making it legal to assassinate Americans w/o charge or trial.
      Continued the PRISM massive NSA spying program..
      Signed the Patriot Act extension into law..
      .

    17. Re:The terrorists are already here. by c0lo · · Score: 1

      Congress is so corrupt that they have made their corruption legal and no longer answer to the American people who either don't care or are too stupid to realize what's going on. Maybe it's always been an illusion.

      Maybe there's still hope for the congress critters to consider other info

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    18. Re:The terrorists are already here. by c0lo · · Score: 1

      There's really no need to hire someone in Damascus. Just send the chemicals from the CIA to the Saudi Mukhabarat, they'll pass it on to Al Nusra or an like-minded affiliate and BOOM there's your red line.

      And there are stories already, where some rebels tell an AP reporter that their guys were just transporting/storing the shit for another group, and didn't know what it was, and there was this accident, and a bunch of their guys got killed.

      You mean stories like this?

      Could even be true. Of course, it could be a cover story for a rebel gas attack intended to be blamed on the government ("we didn't do it on purpose!"), or one rebel group setting another up to take the fall, or it could be Syrian government disinformation (Russian news sources are carrying this story), or it could just be another rumor in the fog of war.

      What about the WingNutDaily; my guess: being a conservative creature, WND would be as far as possible from embracing Russia as one can imagine.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    19. Re:The terrorists are already here. by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Looking at his actual record, Obama is more George Bush that George Bush was . He's owned and controlled by the same people who own and control Congress.

      Who is it that controls Obama then, the illuminati? The Bilderberg group? Aliens? Do you understand that the theory you just presented of Obama releasing the sarin in Syria puts you on the edge of nutters?

      At worst, Obama is incompetent. He isn't malicious; overall he's a nice guy.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    20. Re:The terrorists are already here. by Nyder · · Score: 1

      Indeed.

      But they really were caught off guard this weekend. He didn't follow the script like his advisors thought he should. Whether this really matters remains to be seen.

      --
      BMO

      That's what happens when you don't hire actors to be presidents.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    21. Re:The terrorists are already here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the WingNutDaily; my guess: being a conservative creature, WND would be as far as possible from embracing Russia as one can imagine.

      I thought about that. OTOH, Putin and Russia aren't exactly poster children for socialist revolution, are they? In a lot of ways, Putin is as rightwing as WND, and neither one of them likes Obama. Politics makes strange bedfellows. After all, the US, Al Quaida, and Israel are on the same side, so why not WND and Russia on the other side?

    22. Re:The terrorists are already here. by caballew · · Score: 1

      Who is it that controls Obama then, the illuminati? The Bilderberg group? Aliens? Do you understand that the theory you just presented of Obama releasing the sarin in Syria puts you on the edge of nutters? At worst, Obama is incompetent. He isn't malicious; overall he's a nice guy.

      I didn't say Obama or the U.S. government was behind releasing the sarin. I said that it might have been released to benefit and promote our political agenda at home (NSA, etc.) as well as our foreign policy.

      If a third-party wanted us involved, the release of WMD is a proven catalyst to get the U.S. involved in a conflict.
      The question is does the involvement of the U.S. in Syria, even if it furthers the political agenda at home (NSA, etc.) as well as our foreign policy, hurt us or help us in the long run? Al Qaeda already has a foothold, it's influence will surely increase. Russia and China can point out that the U.S. is the only superpower who is continuing to interfere in the sovereign operations of third-world (maybe two and a half-world) governments resulting turning world opinion against us. The economic drain of the continued military actions is bankrupting us.

      It's a case of getting what the U.S. wants could be the worse thing thing for the U.S however the economic and political significance of that action will benefit many industrial and financial factions as well as other governments.

      Then again, this could all be caused by a small group of Syrian military or political fanatics. We will probably never know the real truth. The victors always write the history not necessary the truth.

    23. Re:The terrorists are already here. by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Then again, this could all be caused by a small group of Syrian military or political fanatics.

      Then again, you could be ignorant and insane. So now you're blaming Russia or China for releasing sarin in Syria? That makes sense........

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    24. Re:The terrorists are already here. by caballew · · Score: 1

      Then again, you could be ignorant and insane. So now you're blaming Russia or China for releasing sarin in Syria? That makes sense........

      I didn't blame anybody. All I said was that even if it promoted U.S. policy it doesn't mean the U.S. did it. I might be ignorant because I don't have the facts but your statement shows is you couldn't comprehend my point. I'd rather be ignorant than stupid.

    25. Re: The terrorists are already here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given the present short-term historical US 'war' record, the Syria ordeal feels highly orchestrated. And not by Syria.

      Look at the facts. Iraq war dwindling down for US troops, as is Afghanistan. Egypt, Libya, and the other 'Arab Spring' countries aren't being touched by US forces, at least not by significant numbers. We are sending small numbers to Somalia, but that's normal since nobody wants a 20 year reunion. Turkey has its own issues, which we don't want to interrupt since they have too much strategic importance for us to meddle in. And Iran? That's a hornets nest that has WAY too much collateral problem, namely Russi and China. India, and Pakistan have been business as usual, and being that they're both nuclear, thats only touchable with kid gloves. South America in all this? Well, drug
      countries are still at it and everyone else is bustling right along. Venezuela was a target, but have actually cooled off and the US can't
      overthrow a dictator like it could during the cold war as there are too many witnesses today.

      So what's left? Israel and Palestine? That fire is perpetually burning, and unless we want piss off the entire Arab world, we'll do business as usual and give them funding.

      Who's left then, and still in the middle of the problem areas? Jordan? Don't hear too much about them, as they're kinda like the Switzwrland of the Arab world. That just leaves Syria, which is ripe for turning into a cluster fuck situation.

      As far as whether the US, or an allie, had a hand in the supposed sarin gas attack, who knows. Not out of the realm of possibility since we're more than happy to go to war under false pretenses, but this feels like a harder sell for the American people. Obama could go it alone, but I think if he did, whatever legacy he hoped to leave as POTUS, would be tarnished and he'd be branded a warmonger worse than Bush Jr. will be.

      Timing just feels too consistent. Syria was what was next after Afghanistan and Iraq. Not too far removed fr force deployment, and still in the uncertain hotbed of the middle east. Keeps turmoil in the news, and fear on Americans minds, as terrorists might be there plotting our demise. Meanwhile, locals will die, and we'll be damned either way, if we had no hand in it or not, and whether we help or not.

    26. Re:The terrorists are already here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would someone kidnap Barack Hussein Obama and spirit him away to an undisclosed foreign land other than Canada or Mexico? Please. Think of the children.

    27. Re:The terrorists are already here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The British didn't follow the script and it screwed up all the plans, Obama was just doing damage control.

    28. Re:The terrorists are already here. by dbIII · · Score: 2

      You wanted a President that was not on vacation all the time and you got one - thus "more bush than bush" since he actually turns up to work.
      I've got no idea why people thought a constitutional lawyer was some sort of radical that was going to change everything overnight instead of the reality of a guy that was going to run things the same way as before with maybe a bit of tinkering around the edges. IMHO the other choices you were given were far worse, and it's going to be a lot of making the best of some bad choices for a while until the USA climbs out of it's current economic hole.

    29. Re:The terrorists are already here. by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I'd rather be ignorant than stupid.

      I'm pretty sure you fail on both points. But that's ok, both are curable.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    30. Re:The terrorists are already here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's not. Dear caballew: this is what we call "feeding trolls".

    31. Re:The terrorists are already here. by romons · · Score: 1

      Look here. The US has been a bad guy for many, many years. The last three years have been better than average, I suspect. We've drawn down involvement in illegal wars abroad, and tried to be pro-democracy in the middle east, even against our real economic interests, or the interests of our allies.

      Another interesting source (that I just watched on netflix) is here: William Colby. This guy was a real spook, was involved in OSS work during WWII, early vietnam, CIA director under Nixon and Ford, who basically came clean during the Ford administration to congress. Got fired because of it (they hired George HW Bush to replace him!). Think of the things the CIA was doing back then! Assassinations, overthrows of governments, covert shit we still don't know about, and probably never will.

      The NSA thing is basically just business as usual. Nearly everybody in congress who had to know about it supports it. You don't think the CIA was tapping phones during the cold war? They just weren't as good at it. If tapping phones is the worst thing they do, I'd be amazed and pleased. If the Snowden release gives them a bit more trouble making mischief, enjoy the respite. They'll be back at it again next week.

      --
      Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company -- Mark Twain
    32. Re:The terrorists are already here. by betterprimate · · Score: 1

      From my knowledge, it has existed for 100 years but had escalated under the Kissinger era. There was a time when the U.S. government did good, but that's a long time ago and most of our good causes have been stricken from the record.

      Does Lincoln get credit for curtailing Napoleon III's imperialistic pursuits? Who remembers when the U.S. intervened in the brutal and barbaric Turk invasion of Greece after women and children were pushed out of the city and into the sea to drown? There are many examples that you wouldn't even be able to find on Wikipedia; they're not longer publicly accessible knowledge.

      The American people are virtuous but that is not reflected in our governments' actions. Today, corporate and elitist interests write our laws, own our land, and start and profit from our wars.

      At the very least, keep being good. All things perish.

    33. Re:The terrorists are already here. by caballew · · Score: 1

      The American people are virtuous but that is not reflected in our governments' actions.

      Most American people are:
      a) like sheep, always ready to be led by some demagogue without understanding the reasons or consequences
      b) indifferent until it affects them personally
      c) critics who always complain but never get involved.

      Today, corporate and elitist interests write our laws, own our land, and start and profit from our wars.

      Very succinct. I don't know if I have ever heard expressed better.

  10. Double super secret infilitrator by Ice+Station+Zebra · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yea, that's the ticket. Set the ID10T terrorist up with their very own CIA infilitrator to feed them false intel, then nuke the shit out of them.

  11. Except ... by six025 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The anomalous behavior that sent up red flags could include staffers downloading multiple documents or accessing classified databases they do not normally use for their work, said two people familiar with the software used to monitor employee activity.

    Except, apparently, one Edward Snowden. Which means for all of the paranoia, someone still got through.

    What about the other Snowdens that aren't whistleblowers but real, actual spies?

    This is another reason the NSA et al are foolish to dismiss Snowden as a threat, another reason why he should be embraced as a hero for shining light on a serious problem!

    Peace,
    Andy.

    1. Re:Except ... by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Public dismissal, private firestorm. If you think that the internal reviews and procedure modifications following the Snowden breach bear any resemblance to the internal process review which is actually occurring at the NSA, you're in full denial that the NSA is a very, very orderly and methodical organization. These guys make OCD look like a carefree run through the park.

      There will always be blind spots, and Snowden lit this one up pretty effectively.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    2. Re:Except ... by cold+fjord · · Score: 0, Troll

      This is another reason the NSA et al are foolish to dismiss Snowden as a threat, another reason why he should be embraced as a hero for shining light on a serious problem!

      So you are in favor of courtesy notes from burglars then?

      Dear Homeowner,

      I was able to defeat your expensive alarm system. You should get it checked. The magnetic window sensors don't seem to be working.

      For insurance purposes I estimate you lost $20,000 in cash, jewelry, and electronics.

      --- The Burglar

      I thought the usual accepted protocol was to tell people about weakness instead of robbing them blind first? You know, sort of like the preferred method of addressing security concerns with software?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    3. Re:Except ... by geogob · · Score: 1

      Someone posted this in a comment a few days ago.
      It is a comment from Adam Curtis of the BBC on MI5, which quite well illustrates how effective paranoia driven internal witch hunts are. I can't believe it would any different in American intelligence organisation.

      I believe this comment is quite appropriate once again.Read it. Its worth the laugh.

    4. Re:Except ... by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      Or it could be a race to the cognitive bottom. With the current information, the way Snowden got access was due to boneheaded procedures being used internally. So, it's possible the 4000 they were suspicious of were even dumber than the feds. I'm sure that they are trying to fix things, but that doesn't mean they will be handling it intelligently. Remember, one of their stated solutions is to cut the number of sysadmins by 90% and move things to the 'cloud.'

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    5. Re:Except ... by ebno-10db · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So you are in favor of courtesy notes from burglars then?

      Flawed analogy. Burglars steal your property. Snowden "stole" things that belonged to the people of the United States, and then gave them the access that they'd been denied to their own property! Oh, that's right, it was being kept secret for "our protection" (and the bureaucracy protecting itself - the main reason for government secrets).

    6. Re:Except ... by shentino · · Score: 1

      If the homeowner does not care about security, it's his house, you have no right to barge in and rub his nose in his problems.

      Just let him get robbed

    7. Re:Except ... by wbr1 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Exactly this. Protection through secrecy, like security through obscurity just does not work over the long haul.

      An an anecdotal example, when my great-grandmother died, I was five. My parents inherited a small ladies handgun (22 short semi) from her. I did not know, it was kept secret. It was not locked, just stored on the back of a closet shelf under some shoe boxes. One day at 11 or 12, I noticed two identical shoe boxes in my parents closet were sitting at different heights. Being the curious soul I was, I investigated, and found the handgun in a box with a small amount of ammunition. Playing with it later nearly blew my hand off.

      Secrecy gives a false sense of security, and also promotes lies and egos. It does not further security.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    8. Re:Except ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The so-called burglar of this story is telling the victims of a perverted peeping tom about the dirty videos that have been unlawfully made of them. The peeper is still on the loose and didn't actually lose any of his porn, but evidence was revealed informing the neighborhood of his presence.

    9. Re:Except ... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Yes geogob, it shows everything the US tried to avoid for 40-50 years via cash (good wages), staff education, merit based advancement, good working conditions and compartmentalization.
      The US also took an interesting view of crypto - when it fails/staff walk/spy everything was sort of under a form of compartmentalisation.
      The US wanted to get on with huge global hardware networking and code the software needed to bring it all together. Later they had the science to store more and more.
      Almost all other spy agencies had to work with spies/press/fiction and hope people fell for their PR.
      The US never had to worry about that, they could out spend and out compute the world. The UK gave them global reach.
      Now the warning from the UK is 'new' again. Never hire staff in a rush and read them into the bigger picture - languages, crypto, networking, death squads - all bring short term gain, long term the errors add up.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    10. Re:Except ... by cold+fjord · · Score: 0

      Flawed analogy. Burglars steal your property. Snowden "stole" things that belonged to the people of the United States, and then gave them the access that they'd been denied to their own property! Oh, that's right, it was being kept secret for "our protection" (and the bureaucracy protecting itself - the main reason for government secrets).

      The problem is your flawed understanding, or just plan bad, mistaken ideas.

      You don't personally "own" the launch codes for US nuclear missiles.
      You don't personally "own" the plans for the patrol routes of US nuclear submarines.
      You don't personally "own" the encryption keys used to send instructions to US embassies.
      You don't personally "own" the lists of FBI informants.
      You don't personally "own" the NSA's source code for encrypting Top Secret communications.
      You don't personally "own" the data entrusted by the British and Australian governments to the United States for the purposes of combating terrorism.

      If you think the above aren't part of what protects you, you aren't thinking clearly, or are greatly mistaken. I don't know how you can think that giving away information like that doesn't harm the US and its allies. Government secrets are kept for a lot of reasons: personal privacy, national security, trade secrets, and many other reasons. I don't know how you don't understand that.

      Snowden stole things (notice that unlike you I didn't use scare quotes around stole) that belong to the US government, not you, and in some cases to allied governments. He had no right to take either. Even if you want to either claim he is a "whistleblower" or play dumb on this, he had no right whatsoever to the data from US allies. But he took and released it all the same, after having ran off to communist china and staying at the Russian embassy (where he had his birthday party) before flying to Russia after which the Russians claimed they never knew he was coming. (I'm sure you see nothing odd about that.)

      Another thing: the fact that you pay taxes doesn't make you the personal supervisor of every government employee and entitle you to order them around as if you were a master and they are a slave any more than you are entitled to secret information held by the US government.

      If you want to see the secrets, run for office or get a government job, and please keep your mouth shut.

      You really have a lot of bad ideas. Where do you get them from?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    11. Re:Except ... by cold+fjord · · Score: 0

      Like some intelligent people are prone to, you have taken an idea (security through obscurity doesn't work) perfectly valid in its own domain (encryption algorithms) and misapplied it to another. Many things in life are protected via security through obscurity - hiding the information from other people. You passwords and PINs are probably all protected that way. The encryption used to protect data you are sending had best not work that way. Snowden didn’t make a childish mistake as you did, he deliberately stole the data he took and gave it away to people that would be sure to make it available to everyone, including people that would misuse it. As a result there are terrorist groups that can no longer be tracked because they stopped using the communications means used to track them that Snowden helped inform them was vulnerable. To put this in perspective, if Snowden had been your dad, he wouldn’t have waited for you to find the pistol, he would have taken from its hiding place, handed it to you loaded, and said, “Go play!”

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    12. Re:Except ... by dbIII · · Score: 2

      As a result there are terrorist groups that can no longer be tracked

      Now that's a new one. Citation please of where that came from. Text only please because I do not want to see an image of your anus if that's where it came from.

    13. Re:Except ... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Yes geogob, it shows everything the US tried to avoid for 40-50 years

      Yet they use the fucking polygraph so are already in con artist voodoo land to start with, which is a bit of a handicap in the search for competence.
      They missed the oncoming collapse of the USSR FFS even though the Pope was giving speeches about it and nearly every adult east of Berlin seeing it coming.

    14. Re:Except ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well put :)

    15. Re:Except ... by geogob · · Score: 1

      Yes geogob, it shows everything the US tried to avoid for 40-50 years .

      That's the keyword. You got it right!

      Don't think for a second the British organizations didn't try. And they admirably failed on all levels... especially at searching internal threats, which turned into a paranoid witch hunt. I have no reason or indication to believe it is any different in the US organization - or any organization driven by secrecy for that matter; this is not a problem limited to the US or UK - and I do not believe you have any real indications pointing otherwise either.

      The Snowden case speak for itself I believe, don't you think?

    16. Re:Except ... by wbr1 · · Score: 2

      As a result there are terrorist groups that can no longer be tracked because they stopped using the communications means used to track them that Snowden helped inform them was vulnerable.

      Anyone doing anything illegal, terrorists or otherwise probably already thought their phones were tapped and their internet communications monitored. Any info from Snowden's leaks changes that not one whit.

      If the organization has any intelligence, they either seriously encrypted any important comms, so that authorities could see they were talking, but not what they were talking about, or they used channels not monitored. IE, paper and courier or some sort of private radio.

      Painting Snowden with an OMG, he helped the terrists brush is simply a way to deflect the focuse from the good he did show us. The government has had it's shitty drawers exposed, and instead of trying to wipe and change, it wants to run and hide behind other things.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    17. Re:Except ... by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 1

      How is that a bad solution?

      When your problem is having a lot of people who by definition can't be limited in any real fashion of their access in order to their job, a good answer is, depending on what you think the cost of a breach is, to centralize and reduce the numbers to a level which is manageable for near constant surveillance.

      Maybe you can't keep a close eye on 1000 sysadmins (reasonable, its a number well above the monkey-sphere size of a human brain, so there's a espirit de corps issue there) but if you could get that number down to 100, then that's low enough that you could run them all in the same department, where everyone would "know" everyone as a real person with some room to spare for management and oversight.

      It might not be an ideal or cheap solution, but it would work. Maybe they're weighting off the increased scope of a potential breach against the reductions in likelihood or speed with which it could be caught? Maybe, just maybe, you, Slashdot poster, aren't actually smarter then everyone else in the world.

    18. Re:Except ... by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      It's a bad solution for multiple reasons. One, they announced it publicly ahead of time. It's not directly a layoff since it is focused on contractors, but it has many of the same effects, and the NSA is probably a major client. There's also the issue this was likely a far greater reduction than what is feasible to do, unless they had made very poor staffing choices. An overworked IT department could mean that operational security is even more compromised, and that there's less time for proper audits. Finally, there's the whole cloud issue. They are either going to have it hosted by a third party, in which case they are subjecting themselves to the same kind of concerns, just with a different group, or it's a 'private cloud', which means they are just calling it something different, and would need about the same amount of admins.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    19. Re:Except ... by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Virtually every terrorist group in the world shifting tactics in wake of NSA leaks: U.S. officials
      Terrorists harder to track after Snowden's leaks, officials say

      It's amazing to me that you would think terrorists changing tactics in light of Snowden's leaks would even be a question.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  12. One in five? Really by sandbagger · · Score: 1

    I would imagine that only US citizens can apply to work for the CIA -- there may be the odd expert from other NATO countries but forget that for now -- which means that one fifth of the candidate pool of US citizens who apply is someone 'suspicious.'

    Well, I'd imagine most of the applicants are in the US military, engineers who have drifted into the military projects, and various academics and non-academic experts. Um, one in five of THOSE is a risk? How are you defining risk? Or is every Arabic speaker, brown person, someone who was ever on the university debating club a potential terrorist?

    This is biology 101: you need risk tolerance otherwise if you choose your candidates from too narrow a pool --- say all military -- you risk weakening the working pool. Why? You need outliers to gain perspective otherwise you end up like that British newsman Reginald Bosanquet who struggled reading foreign names on TV each night. I understand that people who are in the military are generally of an authoritarian mindset and right wing, and agree with it as that's sorta what you need to be surviverable as a soldier in combat and likely this is the primary candidate group for the CIA but for policy, economic, cultural and scientific work, you necessarily choose from a broader group of people.

    --
    ---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
    1. Re:One in five? Really by vux984 · · Score: 4, Informative

      No. You misread it.

      Its saying that of the subset of those with suspicious backgrounds one in five is "linked" to terrorism.

      We don't know how big that 'subset' is. It could be (and probably is) quite small. Of 5000 applicants, there might be 20 with "suspicious backgrounds", and of that 20 there might be 4 who they linked to terrorism. The "1 in 5 with links" are of the 20 that were already flagged as suspicious, not the entire pool of applicants.

    2. Re:One in five? Really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would imagine that only US citizens can apply to work for the CIA

      Except for all the H1B's they're hiring.

    3. Re:One in five? Really by Urkki · · Score: 1

      which means that one fifth of the candidate pool of US citizens who apply is someone 'suspicious.'

      I didn't RTFA, but TFS does not say that, read again... Fifth of initially suspicious applicants turned out to really have suspicious connections.

    4. Re:One in five? Really by mspohr · · Score: 1

      They're all "linked" to Kevin Bacon.
      (Thanks to all that metadata that NSA is snarfing up.)

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    5. Re:One in five? Really by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Or is every Arabic speaker ... a potential terrorist?

      Something along those lines was thought by some idiot manager in the "intelligence community" about Farsi speakers a few years ago which let to a lot of job losses and presumably a big hole in HUMINT. Machine translation still leads to the old 1960s "hydraulic ram" -> "water sheep" joke so SIGINT isn't everything. So there you get it - a perception of an increased threat from Iran resulted in discarding the people that would be useful in dealing with it.

  13. That doesn't count any Mossad infiltrators? by leftie · · Score: 1

    Now add in all Israeli intelligence operative assigned to spy on the USA

  14. That Picard facepalm here by dicobalt · · Score: 1

    They could have recruited them and followed them to the source. Goddamn morons over there at the CIA.

    1. Re:That Picard facepalm here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Givien how the NSA,CIA et al work, they're more likely to hire them as potential double agents but then "forget" to tell the other agency about it...

    2. Re:That Picard facepalm here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't work so well if only 1 in 10000 of all those mildly suspicious-looking people are actually out to get you.

    3. Re:That Picard facepalm here by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      Use it as a honeypot.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    4. Re:That Picard facepalm here by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Over at the CIA - they know their history and US politics. The political pressure to hire "any" language experts would have been huge.
      The political pressure to hire a contractor with skill and then give their staff clearance to get the workloads down with background work done later ... would have been ongoing.
      Why where contractors allowed to clear new needed contractors? Why did they trust a new or old firm with a lot of new instant staff? Who stopped the long internal US background interviews and allowed security to be more digital? Who wants press about the CIA at this point in time?
      Strange we are seeing so much - even the well paid pro war sockpuppets look like fools.
      Think of the NSA domestic role in the 1990's and aspects of the converted political Station like positions...
      The GCHQ and NSA have moved up in the political world - that was always the CIA meeting, the tech work lost in lesser committees.
      KGB/GRU like history via the worlds press?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  15. Possible modus opperandi revealed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems like this would be standard procedure for corporate owned security and military industrial complex. Need people with connections that can make calls and channel money for the next big crisis and conflict when things get too peaceful for the defense industry to be profitable. Most of the big terrorist groups really don't do much unless somebody pays them. They may tout the banner of religion or ideology (and use that to bolster their lower ranks with ignorant peons), but to be honest they usually operate as mercenaries.

    So finally, somebody actually put some light on this practice now?

  16. TERRORISTS ALREADY HAVE INVADED NSA/CIA/MILITARY by Seumas · · Score: 1

    Sorry, but the terrorists already have invaded every level of government in America:

    Terrorist: a person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims.

    If that doesn't accurately account for nearly every bureaucrat in the government -- the NSA, CIA, DHS, TSA, military, Pentagon, congressman, senator, mayor, governor, DoD, DoE, police, RNC/DNC -- then what the fuck does?

  17. In the end by lesincompetent · · Score: 4, Funny

    CIA, NSA, FBI etc will gradually lose interest in the general populace and, in the name of self-defense, gradually shift their investigative efforts onto themselves until they'll implode in a singularity of paranoia.

    1. Re:In the end by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A competent and effective agency with -1 employers is a good for the tax payers. Perhaps the government can then distribute this model to the private industry with its outreach programs and to benefit the stock holders. Just don't look too close those companies operations or they'll suck your money like there is no tomorrow, ever.

  18. Downloading multiple files... by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

    The anomalous behavior that sent up red flags could include staffers downloading multiple documents or accessing classified databases they do not normally use for their work, said two people familiar with the software used to monitor employee activity.

    Downloading multiple files? Gee... it sounds like the NSA watchdogs are watching NSA staff so closely the typical NSA staffer has little time to do any actual work between attending regularly scheduled interrogations related the multitude of internal affairs investigations he set in motion while trying to get a bit of work done.

    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow
  19. "Significant" defined by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    The CIA found that among a subset of job seekers whose backgrounds raised questions, roughly one out of every five had "significant terrorist and/or hostile intelligence connections"...

    In other words, they either had a beard, have a "muslimy" name, or once touched somebody with a muslimy name.

    1. Re:"Significant" defined by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      In other words, they either had a beard, have a "muslimy" name, or once touched somebody with a muslimy name.

      Nah, they probably favor Constitutional government, rule of law, and have a garden.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  20. Prospects tripped up in interview questions by JoeyRox · · Score: 4, Funny

    Q: What do you like doing during your off time? A: l enjoy long-distance bike rides and wishing death to Israel. I mean collecting stamps.

    1. Re:Prospects tripped up in interview questions by TeknoHog · · Score: 2

      Q: What do you like doing during your off time?

      A: I bowl, drive around, the occasional acid flashback.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  21. Re:TERRORISTS ALREADY HAVE INVADED NSA/CIA/MILITAR by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Terrorist" is the new "Red/Commie". Every generation needs a convenient vague Boogyman Bucket to shove people into they don't like.

  22. Is it bad I'm still holding out for aliens? by Progman3K · · Score: 1

    I'm just sayin'

    --
    I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
  23. Terrorists by cphilo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think the problem is EVERYTHING is labeled Top Secret and everything is a terrorist group. Is this going to embarrass Senator X? Label it top secret. Twenty years in the future, this fact MIGHT be pertinent. Label it Super Top Secret. Annoyed with someone? Label him a terrorist. Annoyed with a situation. Must be terrorists. In the rush to cover their governmental asses, everything must be labeled top secret and everyone must be spied on, because, ya know, they might become a terrorist someday. Land of the Free, as long as you do not upset anyone in power: corporate, military or government.

    1. Re:Terrorists by cold+fjord · · Score: 0

      I think the problem is EVERYTHING is labeled Top Secret and everything is a terrorist group.

      Exaggerate much?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    2. Re:Terrorists by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1
      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
  24. This is news? by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 1

    The CIA has been spreading terror for a long as I live.

  25. transparency by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

    Here's hoping that a significant portion of those intelligence employees are whistleblowers like Snowden and Manning. Whatever their personal failings, what they are doing is absolutely positive.

    The US intelligence apparatus has gone way beyond the bounds of what is acceptable for a free society. We've already lost a lot of what allows us to differentiate ourselves from countries like North Korea or Iran, and every time new revelations come out, it's another opportunity for the citizens of the US to be outraged and take a stand.

     

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  26. NO SUCH THING AS A TERRORIST by MRe_nl · · Score: 1

    I've asked everybody on the planet anonymously and nobody considers themselves to be a terrorist.

    --
    "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
  27. And in other news by twistofsin · · Score: 1

    The sky is blue.

    I'd be surprised if terrorists were not trying to infiltrate the CIA.

    1. Re:And in other news by mysidia · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd be surprised if terrorists were not trying to infiltrate the CIA.

      Frankly.... i'd be surprised if they have not already succeeded.

      THAT is what makes me as nervous as hell about the NSA spying on Americans through service providers.

      Leaks like Snowden are proof that whatever they gather might eventually get in the wrong hands one way or another.

      One person's interest in monitoring the public looking for possible terrorists links, Is another person's blackmail material, once the bad guy infiltrators get ahold of Americans' private data

    2. Re:And in other news by number11 · · Score: 2

      I'd be surprised if terrorists were not trying to infiltrate the CIA.

      I doubt it, unless you're including agents of assorted national governments as "terrorists". Private groups aren't going to have the resources to long-term plant members who may never find anything relevant. If your thing is fomenting revolution in Chechnya, having somebody end up being second attache to the embassy in the Philippines or monitoring the cocaine trade in Colombia is a waste you can't afford.

      Now, I'd be surprised if the governments of Russia, China, Israel, Cuba, India, Pakistan, et al. were not trying to infiltrate the CIA. They've got long time horizons and resources that the poor schmuck who's humping a cannister of poison gas from Saudi Arabia to Damascus can only dream of.

    3. Re:And in other news by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Yes East Germany had a dream of pushing out ~20yo staff from the East into entry West Germany multinational/gov management career paths.
      Over a lifetime you would on average have a few middle ranking staff and maybe some inner circle staff.
      West German police and federal agencies where fast to note people with perfect pasts, perfect haircuts dropping in to get local documents in a time when West Germany was having internal youth issues.
      Most countries just seem to be focused on the US press/academic side, flooding in students hoping some/many will return with skills/insights.
      Getting a dual citizen close to US clearances is hard work for all but a few very select nations within the CIA.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  28. Washington Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This actually makes the United States look good, doesn't it?

    "Just look at the kinds of threats we have to deal with! If we didn't have these massive surveillance capabilities, our government would soon be overrun by terrorists!"

    Is this the best we can expect from the Washington Post now that they're working "in consultation with the Obama administration"?

  29. And this is a revelation how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't see why people act so surprised, spies infiltrating other spy organizations has been the subject of books and films for a hundred years or more.

  30. Even worse: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    terrorists are trying to infiltrate my brown starfish! They want to stick their penises in my all-american asshole! If a terrorist wants to suck your dick, why not?. But don't let him stick his finger up your poop chute!

    1. Re:Even worse: by thinkingrodent · · Score: 1

      What the....

  31. I guess they did that .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and they all ended up comprising the CIA ..

  32. The Enemy Within ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is always the most insidious enemy.

  33. Re:I don't see the difference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Holy shit, I never thought anyone else would notice al-Qaeda is just the Saudi wing of the CIA.

  34. Not exactly surprised by Guru80 · · Score: 1

    I've watched enough movies to know that is what spies do...infiltrate other spy organizations. Welcome to the first time someone sat around a fire with a bunch of people they just befriended in their freshly skinned furs to find out when they were going to be bringing their pointy sticks to the other camp of guys sitting around a fire eating their freshly butchered mammoth.

  35. Genetical illnesses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would seem that in the English-speaking world it is considered that homosexuality is a genetical disease from within, and terrorism is a genetical disease from outside. If they want them, it is their problem.

  36. The origin of MI5/MI6 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "One of the most famous successes of the British Security Service was its great spy round-up of August 1914. The event is still celebrated by MI5, but a careful study of the recently-opened records show it to be a complete fabrication - MI5 created and perpetuated this remarkable lie.

    The great spy round-up of August 1914 never took place - as it was a complete fabrication designed to protect MO5(G) from the interference of politicians or bureaucrats.

    The claim made next day that all but one had been arrested was false, and its constant repetition by Kell and Holt-Wilson was a lie."

    In other words - MI5 had followed the shining example of William Le Queux and made it all up.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/posts/BUGGER

    Convenient paranoia in the TLAs is not new.

  37. Duh! by Virtucon · · Score: 1

    OMG, talk about an something Obvious. Shit, the Chinese, the North Koreans, the Russians, hell every country on Earth is trying to get their people into the CIA, and if they can't do that I'm sure they'll find some agency they can get into. If that fails there's always Industrial Espionage as well. Even a ex-CIA official thinks it's worse than in the cold war.

    It's time to realize that a) we spy on the world and b) they spy on us and Industrial Espionage is probably more common than you think, even when the spies are employed to spy on companies in the same country!. http://images.businessweek.com/slideshows/20110919/famous-cases-of-corporate-espionage#slide6

       

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  38. Re:I don't see the difference by c0lo · · Score: 1

    Holy shit, I never thought anyone else would notice al-Qaeda is just the Saudi wing of the CIA.

    List of prominent people which had noticed as well (some even in the US congress).

    --
    Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  39. Degree of Separation by b4upoo · · Score: 1

    So I know ten people and although I can be fairly certain that none of them would ever use terror tactics one might have a negative view of the nation. Now that guy probably knows someone more likely to become violent at some point in the future. One can clearly see how easily one's name might get on some watch list. Most people are probably only a couple of layers of isolation away from knowing some sort or terror nut. And we don't even know it. I would think that a good enemy agent would give of an image of being beyond reproach and might be the guy leading the parade and carrying our flag. They surely are not stupid enough to express ideas that would make others suspect them.

    1. Re:Degree of Separation by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Thanks to the Iraqi supergun guy going to conferences I'm only three steps away from Saddam (and a Mossad death squad) so the degree of separation becomes a vast web in no time, mostly only useful after the fact.

  40. Heh :) by Pseudonymus+Bosch · · Score: 1

    Thanks.

    --
    __
    Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
    GW Bu
  41. BULSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Don't ANY of us know how to read a news story and think for ourselves, anymore?

    There's a methodology used to substantiate this kind of BULLSHIT claim. It can be described as shooting an arrow towards a wall, then drawing a bulls-eye around it, after the fact.

    For another metaphor? Here's the word you get to drive your Mack truck through:

    "Affiliated"

    When you have the NYPD secretly assign all Mosques the "Terrorist Organization" label, and you have the CIA recruiting for record numbers of native Arabic speakers, for translation?

    Call it "Psyop Ju-Jitsu". This is an all-star set up, to make a positive scare-tactic out of the negative public relations resulting from Snowden's revelations.

    By-the-fucking-way, what else do you expect, when you let this kind of shit go down? Objective and agenda-less reporting of fact?

    USA. It's like a police-state with Tesla Model S and overnight shipping, instead of Bread and Circuses.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  42. "We're Going To Release Our Useful Intelligence" by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    "because the best thing we can do is smash our own Honeypot"

    Yeaah. From the Ministry of Truth. Tell me another one.

    Who benefits from this story? "OOOOHHH! Snowden uncovered SCARY MUSLIMS!"

    Only stupid reactionaries, who still believe Obama is a Communist, and not the tool of a Banking Elite, will fall for something this fake.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  43. In Other Words... by classiclantern · · Score: 1

    ... the NSA found 20% of CIA applicants had mentioned "shoes," "underwear," or "pressure cooker" in a phone call or email.

    --
    Now that I said that, I fell better.
  44. No oversight makes government a terrorist paradise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sociopaths are drawn to positions of power.

    Allowing any positions of power without oversight creates a perfect breeding ground for terrorists.

    For example, the cult of Scientology successfully infiltrated the IRS and other government agencies and used government authority to target new victims. See Operation Snow White.

    There's also Whitey Bulger who planted an agent in the FBI that he used to help him commit murder and kidnappings while avoiding local police.

    One extreme case was Kim Philby who rose to the very top of the UK secret police and had been an agent of the USSR since his school days.

    There's also a long list of secret police and their agents who go rogue after tasting power. The violent street gang MS-13 was originally sponsored by the CIA to fight communists. Saddam was sponsored by the US military intelligence to fight Iran. Ahmadinejad was sponsored by the CIA to overthrow Iranian nationalists. Osama was sponsored by the CIA to fight the USSR. Noriega was sponsored by the CIA to fight the communists. The list is practically endless. Even Hitler was originally sponsored by the German secret police to infiltrate the national socialist party. You can think of him as a successful Oliver North. Look up North's involvment in REX84 and their plans for martial law in the US before he was exposed.

    If we want an honest and stable society, we can't allow power without accountability.

  45. Re:I don't see the difference by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    The term has always been Al-CIA-da :)

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  46. According to Kevin Bacon by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    We are all "affiliated" with Al-Qaeda.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  47. uh, wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny how some of the smartest people I know were all home schooled, problem with public school is the whole 'leave no child behind' so you sacrifice the bright students to attempt to smarten up the dumb ones instead of just failing them.

  48. S HIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anything coming from this snowden, especially anything that would aim to cast grave doubts into the activities of OUR US Government should be seen as crap. He shouldn't even have access to release any document and anyone receiving anything from snowden who does not immediately turn it over to the US Government should also not be trusted and be investigated now.

  49. Re:"We're Going To Release Our Useful Intelligence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like when you reply and argue with yourself. It seems to be among the most productive uses of your time.

  50. How is this new revelation justified? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I tend to be mostly on Snowden's side and I think he is fully justified to leak
    evidence of illegal activity but how does he justify leaking this new
    information? I find it interesting but is he now just leaking everything?
    He weakens his case as a "whistleblower" by leaking random stuff classified
    or otherwise that although interesting seems irrelevent to the illegal
    activities he supposably was trying to expose.

    1. Re:How is this new revelation justified? by gnoshi · · Score: 1

      I completely agree. I think whistle-blowers play an important role, but I am failing to see the 'whistle-blowing' in this particular revelation. If he isn't just releasing material for fame and grandstanding (and if he is, most of his releases have been in the public interest anyway) then it is valuable to provide the context in which releasing this kind of information is for the public good.

    2. Re:How is this new revelation justified? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      He's already got more fame than he could possibly want.

  51. How is this new revelation justified? by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

    I tend to be mostly on Snowden's side and I think he is fully justified to leak
    evidence of illegal activity but how does he justify leaking this new
    information? I find it interesting but is he now just leaking everything?
    He weakens his case as a "whistleblower" by leaking random stuff classified
    or otherwise that although interesting seems irrelevent to the illegal
    activities he supposably was trying to expose.

  52. What about the drug cartels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never mind the terrorists, what about Mexican drug cartels? Their power base is just over the border, they have billions of dollars to play with, and the U.S. contains (in various ways) the only real threats to their income stream. Out of all the people with Snowden-level access to the NSA`s databases, do you really think the cartels haven`t managed to compromise at least one?

    Now think about where that leaves you...LEOs getting killed in raids they knew were coming because someone discussed it on a call the NSA wiretapped, politicians and judges being blackmailed with NSA-collected details of their private lives. Anti-cartel activists in Mexico outed by NSA leaks.

    *That* possibility is what Snowden`s leaking has alerted us to. The TLAs have built a surveillance system beyond what the world`s bad actors could dream of, and they have LOST CONTROL OF IT.

  53. Re:TERRORISTS ALREADY HAVE INVADED NSA/CIA/MILITAR by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

    The communist governments of the "Red/Commie Boogyman Bucket," as you refer to it, used to rule a major portion of earth, and managed to kill 100,000,000 people in the last century. Normally bogeymen are considered to be imaginary and don't manage to kill anyone. You may be confused.

    The trailer for The Soviet Story may help you understand, as will this book, The Black Book of Communism reviewed here .

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  54. It's a label not an insult by dbIII · · Score: 2, Interesting

    the US has been accused of imperialism as well for a very long time regardless if it made sense or not

    "From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli"
    Yes the label does make sense, especially in taking over a French colonial war in South East Asia. Also for some reason you seem to have missed that the Korean border was drawn by two guys in the pentagon. A very long list of things went wrong since then, mostly due to every competent potential leader of the north being in the south trying to get Korea united and getting caught off guard by a power hungry idiot, but that war would not have happened without an empire reaching out a hand over the water and drawing an arbitrary line.

    There's some interesting stuff Mark Twain wrote about the Austrian-Hungarian empire when he was a journalist in Europe if you want to get some insight into why the definition fits and why the word empire is not an insult but just a label.

    1. Re:It's a label not an insult by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Yes the label does make sense, especially in taking over a French colonial war in South East Asia.

      I'm afraid you've got that wrong. The French lost that war and gave up their colony. The US wasn't trying to take over South Vietnam and make it a colony. The US was helping South Vietnam avoid being taken over by communist military forces loyal to North Vietnam. Australia participated in the military mission during the Vietnam War, as it had in the Korean War.

      A few details about Korea you left out.

      The Korean War, 1950-1953

      . As the war drew to a close in August of 1945, two U.S. army colonels (one of whom, Dean Rusk, would later become Secretary of State) proposed that the Soviet Union take responsibility for accepting the surrender of Japanese troops in the part of the Korean peninsula north of the 38th parallel, whereas U.S. troops would receive the surrender south of that line. This decision resulted in the division and separation of many villages along the 38th parallel and families with ties across that line. The postwar planners had intended that the division between North and South Korea would be a temporary administrative solution. After the war, the United Nations agreed to oversee elections in the North and South in 1947 in the hopes that it would lead to the reunification of Korea under a democratically elected government. However, the Soviet Union blocked the elections in its section and instead, supported Kim Il Sung as leader of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). In the South, the United States supported Syngman Rhee as the elected leader of the newly founded Republic of Korea (ROK). Both Kim and Rhee were nationalists dedicated to the idea of reunification, although each ruled with a different ideological vision. In 1949, under a UN agreement, both the Soviet Union and the United States withdrew their military forces from Korea, but both left large numbers of advisors on the peninsula. The two sides were to continue negotiations over elections to reunify the country, and although the United States preferred that the resulting government not be communist, in 1949 it was still not prepared to commit militarily to preventing that outcome. Both sides periodically instigated skirmishes across the 38th parallel, but the war formally began when the DPRK crossed the demarcation line and attacked the ROK on June 25, 1950. Both Korean governments had been adamant about reunifying the peninsula, and the Soviet-supported DPRK saw an opportunity to do so with a swift strike.

      As to the line for the US Marine Corp hymn you quote, it notes places they fought, not territories added to the United States.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  55. Re:TERRORISTS ALREADY HAVE INVADED NSA/CIA/MILITAR by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    and managed to kill 100,000,000 people in the last century.

    By depriving them of food and medical care, something a capitalistic society would never do, right?
         

  56. Monitoring employee activity... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But who watches the watchers of the watchers. What are "they" hiding.

  57. well thats a relief by smash · · Score: 1

    ... that the NSA, CIA and friends are collecting ALL of our personally identifying information so it can be stolen from one convenient location.

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  58. Damage control by currently_awake · · Score: 2

    The NSA is now doing a purge to eliminate any potential whistle-blowers from their ranks. The "Terrorist" part is just the public excuse.

  59. including Snowden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cat is out of the bag now. So who is paying Snowden's way? Hezbollah, Iran, Al Queda, China, N. Korea. He will eventually be found out and taken down. All in good time.

  60. Keep your friends close. Keep your enemies closer by russbutton · · Score: 1

    This looks like an opportunity to me.

  61. Another Power by b4upoo · · Score: 1

    You can bet that the mafia raised certain young people with the intention of getting them as spies within law enforcement agencies. The Outlaw motorcycle gang apparently went out of its way to get agents into the Florida law enforcement agencies with the intention of avoiding arrests and squirreling up convictions. You can imagine how this must work. You get a willing high school kid that fits the bill and keep him supplied with favors. It might be cars or motorcycles or girls or cash. But the deal is that they must do well in school and avoid trouble at all costs and do things that would look good for them as an employee applicant. In essence the guy will be useless at first but as he gains more and more exposure to information he can feed the club with ways to avoid convictions as well as ways to take money or make money. For example if you know of a dealer who has cash on hand the gang can strike and make quite a bit of cash with ease. Even mundane information such as who is applying to purchase an expensive gun or what address an expensive car or motorcycle lists on its registration can come in handy. And hooker arrests are of interest as well as a bit of overwhelming persuasion can take place to have her pimped out by the gang. One wonders how common this type of thing is in law enforcement agencies.

  62. Wait, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Terrorists Attempting To Infiltrate CIA

    And here I was brought under the impression that they where already staffed by them.

  63. Is Everyone's Attention Span This Short? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did everyone seriously forget that it's the other way around? The CIA created and trained a lot of these "freedom fighter" groups to install regimes in various countries over the past 70 years in the middle east. It's like most things the US Gov and it's corporate sponsors do; Arm a group of people, let them wreak chaos on an area, claim they need the intervention of the US war machine to save them, then loot them blind (unless it's a proxy war) before leaving them far worse off than they ever were.

  64. Pot, kettle ? by Zoxed · · Score: 1

    Would it not be surprising if they did not try ?

  65. Neocons for a dystopian tomorrow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If OP could please reply,

    Why did they want us to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq? It still doesn't make sense to me. Resources?

    1. Re:Neocons for a dystopian tomorrow by bmo · · Score: 1

      >why

      Empire building. Totally ignoring what happened to all the unsupportable empires of the Great Game.

      As if the US is any different.

      Go read the About Us on the FPI site and the Mission Statement on the PNAC site. Somehow the US is going to be astride the entire planet, according to them.

      They're nuts. And they have actual power.

      --
      BMO

    2. Re:Neocons for a dystopian tomorrow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same Anon as before; thanks for the reply.

      They are crazy. It continues to not make sense, but you have shown that the answer is, in fact, non-sensical.

      So, it really was about terrorists in a way? (they are against ideological enemies) I went looking for other answers because I couldn't believe that one.

      Someone should get these people out of government. I knew Cheney was evil, but I just thought it was corporate greed. This is worse.

    3. Re:Neocons for a dystopian tomorrow by bmo · · Score: 1

      >So, it really was about terrorists in a way?

      Terrorism is the excuse. The 9/11 truthers have it wrong with regards to the "conspiracy". (saying that it's a conspiracy implies the PNAC/FPI is a secret group - it's not, they published and are proud of what they do) 9/11 was an actual terrorist attack, but the PNAC guys needed their "Pearl Harbor." Without that, none of this shit would have worked. It was just a bad coincidence that it happened while these guys were running the executive branch (the PNAC members list looks like the Bush administration simply lacking their patsy - Bush). Notice how things quickly progressed with gathering up power in the executive branch shortly after. The policy papers were already written ahead of time just in case (think tanks do this all the time, nothing surprising).

      Am I one of those people who think our government bombed our own people like the 9/11 truthers say? Nope, they're nuts. Do I think the PNAC/FPI group grabbed the brass ring when it came around on the carousel? Yup.

      If you read some of my earlier posts about the Romney campaign, they found another patsy in Mittens. While Mittens didn't win, Washington is an incestuous town when it comes to politics, and you can bet that some of Obama's advisers have real good friends on the the PNAC/FPI side.

      You really don't have to dig deep to figure this out, they publish their own stuff and put it all on their web pages. No third party "analysts" needed.

      --
      BMO

  66. Woosh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank god this Snowden thing happened, else the public would have never known that terrorists were attempting to infiltrate the CIA. At least our other government branches are safe. Right guys? Right? Hello?

  67. Depends on your criterium by knarf · · Score: 1

    OK, 'Terrorists' are trying to enter the TLAs. One in five has 'significant terrorist connections'.

    This reminds me of something I read in the local newspaper (run it trough a translator if you don't read Swedish) here in Sweden. A newspaper which is mostly based in TrollhÃttan, a city which has locations for GKN Aerospace, Saab and similar industries. It also has a junior college where you can study several disciplines of engineering, aerospace unsurprisingly being one of them.

    Enter someone by the given name of Hussein. 16 years old, comes out in top of his class and is accepted to the GKN aerospace program, his first choice. Thus far nothing out of the ordinary, a disciplined student getting good results and seemingly on a track for a career in the field he has chosen.

    Enter the American connection. Not more than half a day after he started his education he was called to the principle's office and told he was not allowed to continue his education. Not because he misbehaved. Not because he was not qualified. Only because he happens to be born in Iraq, a country which is on an American export embargo list. Given that GKN seems to have to abide by American export laws - even though we're talking about a Swedish subsidiary of a British company - they 'can not allow him to access the buildings in which American technology is handled'.

    Hussein moved from Iraq to Sweden when he was 3 years old. He has lived in Sweden for 13 years. He is a Swedish citizen. He is born in the wrong country.

    Are those maybe the 'significant terrorist connections' the TLAs are so worried about?

    --
    --frank[at]unternet.org
  68. Actually given that most US Citizens qualify as... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually given that most US Citizens qualify as terrorists for merely supporting the Constitution, having religious believes of the wrong type or otherwise "want the world to be a better place", seems sort of redundant to say "terrorists are trying to infiltrate the CIA" when all you need is US citizens applying to make that true.

  69. system FAIL by sglines · · Score: 1

    Yet the system failed to detect Snowden. I'm guessing that they have the problem of having way too much information and little ability to analyze it. When you think about it they have missed quite a lot in the past few years.

  70. Re:"We're Going To Release Our Useful Intelligence by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    Just an alternative gloss, of the same POV. Not an argument or contradiction. Amplification of one aspect.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  71. windows 7 home premium product key sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    www.windows 8 profetional key.com , forever genuine product key of microsoft office professional plus 2010 , windows 7 product key sale , key store for windoes7 ultimate , windows 7 ultimate product key sale , window xp home edition key product , sell microsoft office 2013 key , -)Jqg1fF
    windows 7 product key sale

    windows 7 ultimate key

    buy windows 7 product key

    windows 7 activation key sale

    windows 7 professional product key sale

    windows 7 home premium product key sale

    windows 7 ultimate product key sale

    windows 7 product key