I think your conception of what being a federal employee is like (and how directly their day to day operations are effected at any time by who the president is) is both completely wrong and ludicrous.
Just out of curiosity, what makes you doubt that? The person in question has worked at the EPA for 38 years according to TFA. We're not talking about some recently appointed political hack... believe me, you've got to be dedicated to make it at any government agency for 38 years!
Being in favor of openness is being in favor of openness even when you don't like what's being said.
I hold no illusions about my stupidity on the subject of inter-muslim relations. I sort of fish for intriguing posts. Most of what I get is recycled talking points.
Heh, that's pretty much the Internet for you:-P
I know the initial split between Sunni and Shia seems tiny to me as an outsider, and at least among Christian sects, they can overcome doctrinal minutiae when the chips are down, so to speak. I hate to make this analogy, but I will anyway, and that is the Shia seem sort of Catholic to me while the Sunnis seem Protestant.
Well, the way the difference is typically described is in terms of "orthodox" and "heterodox." In those terms, the Sunnis are basically the "original" Muslims, and the Shia split off over a fairly long period of time. So looking at it that way, the Roman Catholic church (that claims to be the original Christian church and dates its history directly back to Peter, etc) would be Sunni, and the protestants and Shia would have some similiarities as splinter "heterodox" organizations.
Maybe you can answer some questions for me: are the mainstream Shia usually more fundamentalist than the mainstream Sunni? This was why I got the impression that more fundamentalist Sunnis would be joining forces with Shias.
I don't think you can really say that one group is more fundamentalist than the other. I mean, on the one hand you have the Iranian government -- fundamentalist Shia. On the other hand you have the Wahhabis and people like Bin Ladin --fundamentalist Sunnis.
There are many mainstream and non-fundamentalist Sunni Muslims. There are also mainstream and non-fundamentalist Shia out there. Within Shia Islam there are many subgroups -- for instance the Nizari Ismailis (sometimes derogatively called Aga Khanis) -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nizari_Ismaili. This group centuries ago was known for using campaigns of propaganda and high profile assassinations to accomplish its political goals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashshashin). Today on the otherhand, many Nizari Ismailis are mainstream, secular, modern, what have you.
What sort of news sources would you recommend? I can't read Farsi or Arabic, so I guess the best I can do is Al Jazeera.
Al Jazeera is often very good for alternative perspectives (interesting takes on US news as well). I don't know that I can really recommend any news sources in particular... I mean personally I like BBC reporting as well as any, but you pretty much have to take everything with a grain of salt. My language is no longer up to par, but a lot of Middle Eastern newspapers etc are very into conspiracy theories.
I also guess I would agree that al-Qa'ida is the most dangerous terrorist organization for the US today.
Don't forget that during the campaign Obama said he would be willing to invade Pakistan if there was any "actionable" intelligence. Little different from just bombing.
I personally feel that over the next several years, Pakistan's government will degrade. Hope it doesn't come to more than that.
So how do you feel about the military bases we still maintain today in Germany and Japan (amongst others?)
How do you feel about Incirlik? Guantanamo?
Why were they no bid contracts to American oil companies in 2008?
I just keep learning new facts...and to think I thought BP was British. Silly me.
Beyond that, you're being oddly pedantic. We haven't withdrawn from Iraq. We still have troops helping to maintain order and perform anti-insurgency operations. Why on earth would we withdraw from our bases while we've still got troops on the ground? Am I missing something in your logic here?
I'm not sure if you're confused on the facts or not--it's unclear from your speculations, but just for the record al-Qa'ida is not a Shia organization. While al-Qa'ida in *IRAQ* (see below) might specifically target Shiites, Bin Ladin has in the past made attempts to gain connections with Shia groups (though he has denounced at times as well!).
Also, FWIW, whiel you got the terminology correct, when people talk about the "Shia crescent" however it's usually said to start in Lebanon. It's not exactly a new thing either!
In fact think of al-Qa'ida as a brand, or an overarching corporate entity. Then you have terrorist franchises -- almost all of which ALREADY existed -- that affiliate with al-Qa'ida for name and fame. Thus you have what we call AQI -- Al-Qa'ida in Iraq and they call al-Qa'ida in the land of the two rivers or variants thereof, you have AQIM -- Al-Qa'ida in the Islamic Maghreb (North Africa), etc. How closely are these various groups linked to Bin Ladin? Many not very closely at all. Bin Ladin and AQ are basically lessons in branding, and a brand that globally is LOSING mindshare right now. I would completely DISAGREE with your assertions about al-Qa'ida in Iraq, and point to the awakenning councils as just part of the evidence as to how al-Qa'ida has managed to estrange its base! Unfortunately with the terrible job ALL (and I mean ALL) American news media does covering terrorist organizations, the Iraq war, etc, this is poorly understood and poorly reported on. Thus you get every armchair analyst in the western thinking they understand the complex interrelationships between Sunni and Shia, al-Qa'ida and the Iraq war, etc. The correct answer? "It's complicated.";)
If Al Qeada continues to enjoy the recruiting bonanza of US forces in this area, there's a good chance bin Laden will get the war he was looking for between the west and the muslim world. All he has to do is pull of another terrorist attack inside the US.
You're wrong (IMO of course) about any "recruiting bonanza" that translates into anything greater than jihad in Iraq, etc. America has avoided many of the Russian mistakes in Chechnya and Afghanistan that made this an issue. Furthermore, popularity numbers for al-Qa'ida as a whole due in large parts to the actions of al-Qa'ida in Iraq are down.
Lastly, if you're even REMOTELY right about any of your facts, what is taking so long for al-Qa'ida and Usama to plan an attack in the US? There are any number of extremely devastating attacks that could be pulled off easily, cheaply, and with only a few people -- so what's the hold up?
That's the ridiculous and inappropriate kind of hyperbole that makes people utterly disregard your point of view. You might be surprised how a little phrasing can go a long way...
But isn't the point of choosing to be in any social group an effort to feel better about oneself? Some geeks take the easy way out by making themselves feel taller by shoving people beneath them.
Yeah, I absolutely agree.
I have a very vivid memory of being in 7th grade science class and snickering at this kid who could barely read. At the time it was annoying, funny, and felt like a waste of my time to be in this class (which it probably was)...and my friends and I snickered. I've felt guilty about that for a long time...one of my "wake up" moments in life.
Very well said...that's one of the self-delusions of many in the geek community that really irritates me (that we're smarter ergo better than everyone else). It seems a lot of this goes along with the rise of geek chic.
In highschool and the like, I always felt sorriest for the dumb geeks / dumb nerds...they had it worst of all IMHO. And yes I agree, there are absolutely dumb geeks
I've worked at several places both in the Marine Corps and as a contractor, and they all suck in different ways
Heh, that sums it up fairly nicely.
Regards to the rest...it's all who you feel like rooting for in a particular day. One of my best friends at my job was former Marine intel, went through DIA and then to contracting at CIA (where he had been for a number of years). He was not a fan of DIA. OTOH, the friends I previously mentioned who worked at DIA said the exact same things about CIA. I guessed DIA because they seemed to hate the CIA the most.
I alluded to this in another post, but I think a LOT of the tension in the IC comes from civilian-military issues. Rank/paygrade didn't mean a ton at CIA--people were very candid with bosses, etc. I heard of this causing friction at times with other agencies. I worked in a group where the office I was in literally had people from ~5-6 different agencies sitting in the same room, and we often visited other agencies in the spirit of collaboration. We went to this one DOD location two different times...once with a GS15 in the group and once without. They really rolled out the red carpet for the GS15 versus without. Very weird to me.
I will also say that it varies completely depending on if you are talking about different groups of people...field people vs analysts. I then break down analysts into techies and liberal arts. I could be wrong, but I found the liberal arts analysts of all stripes the worst. The techies seemed to collaborate a lot more from what I could tell though once you get into special issues, it gets a lot more compartmented and closed off.
I think you really hit the nail on the head with your Kool Aid reference...there is a LOT of kool aid and a lot of drinking it going on. Some of that is for the best--there are not a lot of jobs out there where "the mission" is so important and you can get people to work so hard for "the mission."
On the otherhand, you get the horrible sniping, politicking, and striving for airtime. My DIA friends were very upset about the PDB (which has been changing/updating/reforming a great deal in the past decade). I can see their point...why should CIA get to control the PDB now that they're no longer the head of the IC? On the other hand, you take 16 agencies, however many military subdivisions, etc and you try to make a coherent finished product. Regardless of valid concerns, the PDB was just another example of how horrible CIA was, etc.
I guess a lot of what I'm saying boils down to is...how is it that a bunch of 20-somethings (friends+me) could get so invested into that mentality in just a few months of our starting jobs? Everybody just needs to take a chill pill...that's the tribalism I'm talking about. Within months of starting it was pretty ingrained in me that DIA was an awful place to work, did substandard work, and the DNI was a useless piece of bureaucratic nonsense (I still agree with this one FWIW!). My friends at DIA within a month learned that CIA never collaborates, that they tried to stymie the DNI, the analysts don't know their countries, whatever else. There's NO reason the environment should be that way for people just starting off. There are too many agencies, too many people doing the same thing. I don't see any way around that conclusion...
Also, FWIW, the jabber client I was talking about is part of intelink.
Heh yeah... it's (obviously) something I still feel passionately about.
Just really reinforced to me that I am not equipped to work for the government. Some good benefits yes, but sooo much hierarchy, inter-department, inter-agency sniping, politicking, not to mention the military vs civilian hierarchies which gave many agencies VERY different atmospheres.
I actually think that is part of the reason why some Intelligence people don't like cia... did you know that there is a table of rank equivalence for GS pay scales? That is, if you work for the government and you are paid according to the GS scale as a GS-12 you're supposed to be treated like a lieutenant [I'm not sure that's the exact translation..but something like that]. How ludicrous that your pay grade is supposed to determine protocol.
Whenever I read articles on slashdot about NSA, CIA, etc I just have to shake my head...if only more people knew what 99% of those agencies were like...
(Sorry to let you down...no Bond references...there might be a super secret spy catfish though!)
Uhh, I'm not sure if you missed a post or are looking at the thread out of order or something, but the only thing I replied to in this thread was:
Fifth, stealing data from outside a classified DOD network is terribly hard. Having a clearance means that the DOD thinks a given person is trustworthy, so unless a person decides to become a spy there is no way it's getting out.
You may be trying to make some greater overarching point out of that statement, but thats not what I was saying. Anything else you think I'm saying about sharing being bad (??) is purely in your imagination/interpretation I'm afraid...
I suppose it's asking too much to ask where you think I'm claiming anything else??
1. You have no idea where I am. Guess all you want. And if you're trying to guess from my posts, you're probably wrong
Ok, that's fine, I understand you can't/don't want to say (and I wouldn't ask) but hey, I had a what, 1/14 chance of getting it right? Probably more like 1/6 when you exclude the agencies who don't really care about CIA;-) My friends I referenced were at DIA.
2. My first post merely stated surprise that the CIA was coming on board. You then said some very nasty things accusing me of bitching. YOU are the one bitching. YOU are the one laying down hate and blaming everyone for all the problems in the world. YOU are the one who is disgruntled and clearly needs some closure or something. Leave me out of it.
You're absolutely right that I'm bitching about the tribalism in the IC--100% true. What "hate" am I laying down and what "blame" am I laying down for all the problems in the world? I have been very, very specific. I think the agency-partisanship and tribalism in the IC is very detrimental to national security, I think it's ineffective, and I think it has a ton of waste. I think people that are willing--on an open forum on the internet to rant about another IC agency (please see your second post in this thread if you want to see EXACTLY what I'm talking)--are part of the problem of the IC, and not part of the solution. I'm not making any greater claims than that so please stop the hyperbole.
You starting off a post with the very first sentence that says "CIA is about the last agency I'd suspect of trying this." Was so typical of what I remember. You didn't know the first thing about the history or admin or iped, yet you take it as an opportunity to go out of your way to insult another IC org. So yes, I do have a problem with that...I'm sorry if you take that as more than it is.
And I do completely apologize for the slander of accusing you of using jabber and working on your iped user page. I was wrong! You might try the jabber client (though I wouldn't recommend hanging out with the iped people)--it was cool, and a couple of orgs have switched over to using it entirely. Mine was not (though we had it available) and I guess you don't have it.
YOU are the one who is disgruntled and clearly needs some closure or something. Leave me out of it.
There are a lot of disgruntled people in the IC--I'm thankfully no longer one of them!
Like I said the IC needs some major introspection in ALL of its part. I quite frankly find your very obvious anger and loathing very unfortunate. When you go around trashing your fellow-IC mates, I absolutely do have a problem with that. Like I said--I quit, I didn't like the job and I didn't like the tribalism. I've never once claimed CIA is perfect on anything...far from it. The sorry bottom line is this...how many people work in the IC? I think that's technically classified and I don't really know, but let's say 100k+ for the hell of it. Some people are going to get shafted. You can't have that many people all happy and all having equal input. IMHO there's far too much duplication of effort, and my solution would be to fire the majority of people.
I know your organization always feels shafted, and maybe it shouldn't be--I know. When I talk about tribalism, it DOES go both ways, because your org has a certain reputation as well (if you're where I'm guessing you are). I actually have several friends who started at your place several years after I started my job...would you believe that things on a personal level got strained after they started? It's that fucking ludicrous.
I can tell you one thing, and I'm absolutely serious about this. If you really want to be part of changing things, maybe you should stop being so partisan about your organization and so slanderous of cia. Who cares if you have valid points, it's utterly unprofessional and does nothing but REINFORCE tribalism on both sides. You can help take one of the first steps by not being an ass to people with the same job as you, regardless of how they act...
OK, troll, I never said anything about a chat channel or what if anything I personally edit. Read my posts. Or better yet, get the aforementioned clue.
So you're saying you DON'T use jabber chat and DON'T edit your iped userpage?
Heh, I wish (in my experience the people out in the field were the ones who liked their jobs the best, and had to deal with the least politicking bullshit). They're technically not supposed to use internet boards at all. Intelligence/analysis/government employ was a terrible fit for me and I would not recommend it for most people. Can believe it or not (obviously)
No, what's prideful was the OP's 5th point saying how hard it was to steal from a classified network--has nothing to do with the security of yet another website on a classified intranet. I take the viewpoint that it's always better to be vigilant in terms of network security. just because the tubes are supposed to be secure and the users are supposed to be sure doesn't mean that's always true. FWIW, the creators and maintainers of Intellipedia seem to agree with this--Intellipedia is not allowed to contain highly protected intelligence information (you say this too--I'm just noting it to point out we agree)
Caution and vigilance and keeping people educated about security issues is something that is smart for ANY job and ANY network. I like my banks to be careful with my information, for instance...doesn't mean that I don't use online banking.
While pithy, your comment is offtopic and nonsensical.
Slashdot Mirror
Hah, how ironic...yes, you're correct.
I think your conception of what being a federal employee is like (and how directly their day to day operations are effected at any time by who the president is) is both completely wrong and ludicrous.
he's [sec] seems to have spent most of his career writing position papers for economics think tanks
Or working for the EPA for 38 years?
Just out of curiosity, what makes you doubt that? The person in question has worked at the EPA for 38 years according to TFA. We're not talking about some recently appointed political hack... believe me, you've got to be dedicated to make it at any government agency for 38 years!
Being in favor of openness is being in favor of openness even when you don't like what's being said.
Wow, the guy has worked for the EPA for almost 40 years but because he has an MIT PhD in economics, that makes it ok?
It wasn't ok when it was the other side, and it's not ok now. End of story.
I hold no illusions about my stupidity on the subject of inter-muslim relations. I sort of fish for intriguing posts. Most of what I get is recycled talking points.
Heh, that's pretty much the Internet for you :-P
I know the initial split between Sunni and Shia seems tiny to me as an outsider, and at least among Christian sects, they can overcome doctrinal minutiae when the chips are down, so to speak. I hate to make this analogy, but I will anyway, and that is the Shia seem sort of Catholic to me while the Sunnis seem Protestant.
Well, the way the difference is typically described is in terms of "orthodox" and "heterodox." In those terms, the Sunnis are basically the "original" Muslims, and the Shia split off over a fairly long period of time. So looking at it that way, the Roman Catholic church (that claims to be the original Christian church and dates its history directly back to Peter, etc) would be Sunni, and the protestants and Shia would have some similiarities as splinter "heterodox" organizations.
Maybe you can answer some questions for me: are the mainstream Shia usually more fundamentalist than the mainstream Sunni? This was why I got the impression that more fundamentalist Sunnis would be joining forces with Shias.
I don't think you can really say that one group is more fundamentalist than the other. I mean, on the one hand you have the Iranian government -- fundamentalist Shia. On the other hand you have the Wahhabis and people like Bin Ladin --fundamentalist Sunnis.
There are many mainstream and non-fundamentalist Sunni Muslims. There are also mainstream and non-fundamentalist Shia out there. Within Shia Islam there are many subgroups -- for instance the Nizari Ismailis (sometimes derogatively called Aga Khanis) -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nizari_Ismaili. This group centuries ago was known for using campaigns of propaganda and high profile assassinations to accomplish its political goals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashshashin). Today on the otherhand, many Nizari Ismailis are mainstream, secular, modern, what have you.
What sort of news sources would you recommend? I can't read Farsi or Arabic, so I guess the best I can do is Al Jazeera.
Al Jazeera is often very good for alternative perspectives (interesting takes on US news as well). I don't know that I can really recommend any news sources in particular... I mean personally I like BBC reporting as well as any, but you pretty much have to take everything with a grain of salt. My language is no longer up to par, but a lot of Middle Eastern newspapers etc are very into conspiracy theories.
I also guess I would agree that al-Qa'ida is the most dangerous terrorist organization for the US today.
The Taliban was a client of ours until the September 11th attacks
What does that mean, and how do you justify your statement?
Don't forget that during the campaign Obama said he would be willing to invade Pakistan if there was any "actionable" intelligence. Little different from just bombing.
I personally feel that over the next several years, Pakistan's government will degrade. Hope it doesn't come to more than that.
So how do you feel about the military bases we still maintain today in Germany and Japan (amongst others?)
How do you feel about Incirlik? Guantanamo?
Why were they no bid contracts to American oil companies in 2008?
I just keep learning new facts...and to think I thought BP was British. Silly me.
Beyond that, you're being oddly pedantic. We haven't withdrawn from Iraq. We still have troops helping to maintain order and perform anti-insurgency operations. Why on earth would we withdraw from our bases while we've still got troops on the ground? Am I missing something in your logic here?
I'm not sure if you're confused on the facts or not--it's unclear from your speculations, but just for the record al-Qa'ida is not a Shia organization. While al-Qa'ida in *IRAQ* (see below) might specifically target Shiites, Bin Ladin has in the past made attempts to gain connections with Shia groups (though he has denounced at times as well!).
Also, FWIW, whiel you got the terminology correct, when people talk about the "Shia crescent" however it's usually said to start in Lebanon. It's not exactly a new thing either!
In fact think of al-Qa'ida as a brand, or an overarching corporate entity. Then you have terrorist franchises -- almost all of which ALREADY existed -- that affiliate with al-Qa'ida for name and fame. Thus you have what we call AQI -- Al-Qa'ida in Iraq and they call al-Qa'ida in the land of the two rivers or variants thereof, you have AQIM -- Al-Qa'ida in the Islamic Maghreb (North Africa), etc. How closely are these various groups linked to Bin Ladin? Many not very closely at all. Bin Ladin and AQ are basically lessons in branding, and a brand that globally is LOSING mindshare right now. I would completely DISAGREE with your assertions about al-Qa'ida in Iraq, and point to the awakenning councils as just part of the evidence as to how al-Qa'ida has managed to estrange its base! Unfortunately with the terrible job ALL (and I mean ALL) American news media does covering terrorist organizations, the Iraq war, etc, this is poorly understood and poorly reported on. Thus you get every armchair analyst in the western thinking they understand the complex interrelationships between Sunni and Shia, al-Qa'ida and the Iraq war, etc. The correct answer? "It's complicated." ;)
If Al Qeada continues to enjoy the recruiting bonanza of US forces in this area, there's a good chance bin Laden will get the war he was looking for between the west and the muslim world. All he has to do is pull of another terrorist attack inside the US.
You're wrong (IMO of course) about any "recruiting bonanza" that translates into anything greater than jihad in Iraq, etc. America has avoided many of the Russian mistakes in Chechnya and Afghanistan that made this an issue. Furthermore, popularity numbers for al-Qa'ida as a whole due in large parts to the actions of al-Qa'ida in Iraq are down.
Lastly, if you're even REMOTELY right about any of your facts, what is taking so long for al-Qa'ida and Usama to plan an attack in the US? There are any number of extremely devastating attacks that could be pulled off easily, cheaply, and with only a few people -- so what's the hold up?
That's the ridiculous and inappropriate kind of hyperbole that makes people utterly disregard your point of view. You might be surprised how a little phrasing can go a long way...
But isn't the point of choosing to be in any social group an effort to feel better about oneself? Some geeks take the easy way out by making themselves feel taller by shoving people beneath them.
Yeah, I absolutely agree.
I have a very vivid memory of being in 7th grade science class and snickering at this kid who could barely read. At the time it was annoying, funny, and felt like a waste of my time to be in this class (which it probably was) ...and my friends and I snickered. I've felt guilty about that for a long time...one of my "wake up" moments in life.
Very well said...that's one of the self-delusions of many in the geek community that really irritates me (that we're smarter ergo better than everyone else). It seems a lot of this goes along with the rise of geek chic.
In highschool and the like, I always felt sorriest for the dumb geeks / dumb nerds...they had it worst of all IMHO. And yes I agree, there are absolutely dumb geeks
I've worked at several places both in the Marine Corps and as a contractor, and they all suck in different ways
Heh, that sums it up fairly nicely.
Regards to the rest...it's all who you feel like rooting for in a particular day. One of my best friends at my job was former Marine intel, went through DIA and then to contracting at CIA (where he had been for a number of years). He was not a fan of DIA. OTOH, the friends I previously mentioned who worked at DIA said the exact same things about CIA. I guessed DIA because they seemed to hate the CIA the most.
I alluded to this in another post, but I think a LOT of the tension in the IC comes from civilian-military issues. Rank/paygrade didn't mean a ton at CIA--people were very candid with bosses, etc. I heard of this causing friction at times with other agencies. I worked in a group where the office I was in literally had people from ~5-6 different agencies sitting in the same room, and we often visited other agencies in the spirit of collaboration. We went to this one DOD location two different times...once with a GS15 in the group and once without. They really rolled out the red carpet for the GS15 versus without. Very weird to me.
I will also say that it varies completely depending on if you are talking about different groups of people...field people vs analysts. I then break down analysts into techies and liberal arts. I could be wrong, but I found the liberal arts analysts of all stripes the worst. The techies seemed to collaborate a lot more from what I could tell though once you get into special issues, it gets a lot more compartmented and closed off.
I think you really hit the nail on the head with your Kool Aid reference...there is a LOT of kool aid and a lot of drinking it going on. Some of that is for the best--there are not a lot of jobs out there where "the mission" is so important and you can get people to work so hard for "the mission."
On the otherhand, you get the horrible sniping, politicking, and striving for airtime. My DIA friends were very upset about the PDB (which has been changing/updating/reforming a great deal in the past decade). I can see their point...why should CIA get to control the PDB now that they're no longer the head of the IC? On the other hand, you take 16 agencies, however many military subdivisions, etc and you try to make a coherent finished product. Regardless of valid concerns, the PDB was just another example of how horrible CIA was, etc.
I guess a lot of what I'm saying boils down to is...how is it that a bunch of 20-somethings (friends+me) could get so invested into that mentality in just a few months of our starting jobs? Everybody just needs to take a chill pill...that's the tribalism I'm talking about. Within months of starting it was pretty ingrained in me that DIA was an awful place to work, did substandard work, and the DNI was a useless piece of bureaucratic nonsense (I still agree with this one FWIW!). My friends at DIA within a month learned that CIA never collaborates, that they tried to stymie the DNI, the analysts don't know their countries, whatever else. There's NO reason the environment should be that way for people just starting off. There are too many agencies, too many people doing the same thing. I don't see any way around that conclusion...
Also, FWIW, the jabber client I was talking about is part of intelink.
Heh yeah... it's (obviously) something I still feel passionately about.
Just really reinforced to me that I am not equipped to work for the government. Some good benefits yes, but sooo much hierarchy, inter-department, inter-agency sniping, politicking, not to mention the military vs civilian hierarchies which gave many agencies VERY different atmospheres.
I actually think that is part of the reason why some Intelligence people don't like cia ... did you know that there is a table of rank equivalence for GS pay scales? That is, if you work for the government and you are paid according to the GS scale as a GS-12 you're supposed to be treated like a lieutenant [I'm not sure that's the exact translation..but something like that]. How ludicrous that your pay grade is supposed to determine protocol.
Whenever I read articles on slashdot about NSA, CIA, etc I just have to shake my head...if only more people knew what 99% of those agencies were like...
(Sorry to let you down...no Bond references...there might be a super secret spy catfish though!)
Nevermind, I was just curious... I thought I might have personally insulted you.
You're not Need to Share, not Need to Know guy, are you?
Uhh, I'm not sure if you missed a post or are looking at the thread out of order or something, but the only thing I replied to in this thread was:
Fifth, stealing data from outside a classified DOD network is terribly hard. Having a clearance means that the DOD thinks a given person is trustworthy, so unless a person decides to become a spy there is no way it's getting out.
You may be trying to make some greater overarching point out of that statement, but thats not what I was saying. Anything else you think I'm saying about sharing being bad (??) is purely in your imagination/interpretation I'm afraid...
I suppose it's asking too much to ask where you think I'm claiming anything else??
1. You have no idea where I am. Guess all you want. And if you're trying to guess from my posts, you're probably wrong
Ok, that's fine, I understand you can't/don't want to say (and I wouldn't ask) but hey, I had a what, 1/14 chance of getting it right? Probably more like 1/6 when you exclude the agencies who don't really care about CIA ;-) My friends I referenced were at DIA.
2. My first post merely stated surprise that the CIA was coming on board. You then said some very nasty things accusing me of bitching. YOU are the one bitching. YOU are the one laying down hate and blaming everyone for all the problems in the world. YOU are the one who is disgruntled and clearly needs some closure or something. Leave me out of it.
You're absolutely right that I'm bitching about the tribalism in the IC--100% true. What "hate" am I laying down and what "blame" am I laying down for all the problems in the world? I have been very, very specific. I think the agency-partisanship and tribalism in the IC is very detrimental to national security, I think it's ineffective, and I think it has a ton of waste. I think people that are willing--on an open forum on the internet to rant about another IC agency (please see your second post in this thread if you want to see EXACTLY what I'm talking)--are part of the problem of the IC, and not part of the solution. I'm not making any greater claims than that so please stop the hyperbole.
You starting off a post with the very first sentence that says "CIA is about the last agency I'd suspect of trying this." Was so typical of what I remember. You didn't know the first thing about the history or admin or iped, yet you take it as an opportunity to go out of your way to insult another IC org. So yes, I do have a problem with that...I'm sorry if you take that as more than it is.
And I do completely apologize for the slander of accusing you of using jabber and working on your iped user page. I was wrong! You might try the jabber client (though I wouldn't recommend hanging out with the iped people)--it was cool, and a couple of orgs have switched over to using it entirely. Mine was not (though we had it available) and I guess you don't have it.
YOU are the one who is disgruntled and clearly needs some closure or something. Leave me out of it.
There are a lot of disgruntled people in the IC--I'm thankfully no longer one of them!
Like I said the IC needs some major introspection in ALL of its part. I quite frankly find your very obvious anger and loathing very unfortunate. When you go around trashing your fellow-IC mates, I absolutely do have a problem with that. Like I said--I quit, I didn't like the job and I didn't like the tribalism. I've never once claimed CIA is perfect on anything...far from it. The sorry bottom line is this...how many people work in the IC? I think that's technically classified and I don't really know, but let's say 100k+ for the hell of it. Some people are going to get shafted. You can't have that many people all happy and all having equal input. IMHO there's far too much duplication of effort, and my solution would be to fire the majority of people.
I know your organization always feels shafted, and maybe it shouldn't be--I know. When I talk about tribalism, it DOES go both ways, because your org has a certain reputation as well (if you're where I'm guessing you are). I actually have several friends who started at your place several years after I started my job...would you believe that things on a personal level got strained after they started? It's that fucking ludicrous.
I can tell you one thing, and I'm absolutely serious about this. If you really want to be part of changing things, maybe you should stop being so partisan about your organization and so slanderous of cia. Who cares if you have valid points, it's utterly unprofessional and does nothing but REINFORCE tribalism on both sides. You can help take one of the first steps by not being an ass to people with the same job as you, regardless of how they act...
OK, troll, I never said anything about a chat channel or what if anything I personally edit. Read my posts. Or better yet, get the aforementioned clue.
So you're saying you DON'T use jabber chat and DON'T edit your iped userpage?
Heh, I wish (in my experience the people out in the field were the ones who liked their jobs the best, and had to deal with the least politicking bullshit). They're technically not supposed to use internet boards at all. Intelligence/analysis/government employ was a terrible fit for me and I would not recommend it for most people. Can believe it or not (obviously)
No, what's prideful was the OP's 5th point saying how hard it was to steal from a classified network--has nothing to do with the security of yet another website on a classified intranet. I take the viewpoint that it's always better to be vigilant in terms of network security. just because the tubes are supposed to be secure and the users are supposed to be sure doesn't mean that's always true. FWIW, the creators and maintainers of Intellipedia seem to agree with this--Intellipedia is not allowed to contain highly protected intelligence information (you say this too--I'm just noting it to point out we agree)
Little bit of a non-sequitur there!
Caution and vigilance and keeping people educated about security issues is something that is smart for ANY job and ANY network. I like my banks to be careful with my information, for instance...doesn't mean that I don't use online banking.
While pithy, your comment is offtopic and nonsensical.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8086547.stm
Because I like BBC...
I think it's very dangerous to think that your data is safe simply because your data transport is deemed safe.
And now I'm only semi-AC! :-P