Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Biden Reveals Location of Secret VP Bunker

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the so-it's-the-basement-then dept.

United States 550

Hugh Pickens writes "Fox News reports that 'Vice President Joe Biden, well-known for his verbal gaffes, may have finally outdone himself, divulging potentially classified information meant to save the life of a sitting vice president.' According to the report, while recently attending the Gridiron Club dinner in Washington, an annual event where powerful politicians and media elite get a chance to cozy up to one another, Biden told his dinnermates about the existence of a secret bunker under the old US Naval Observatory, which is now the home of the vice president. Although earlier reports had placed the Vice-Presidential hide-out in a highly secure complex of buildings inside Raven Rock Mountain near Blue Ridge Summit, Pennsylvania, Fox News reports that the Naval Observatory bunker is believed to be the secure, undisclosed location former Vice President Dick Cheney remained under protection in secret after the 9/11 attacks. According to the report, Biden 'said a young naval officer giving him a tour of the residence showed him the hideaway, which is behind a massive steel door secured by an elaborate lock with a narrow connecting hallway lined with shelves filled with communications equipment.' According to Eleanor Clift, Newsweek magazine's Washington contributing editor 'the officer explained that when Cheney was in lock down, this was where his most trusted aides were stationed, an image that Biden conveyed in a way that suggested we shouldn't be surprised that the policies that emerged were off the wall.' In December 2002, neighbors complained of loud construction work being done at the Naval Observatory, which has been used as a residence by vice presidents since 1974. The upset neighbors were sent a letter by the observatory's superintendent, calling the work 'sensitive in nature' and 'classified' and that it was urgent it be completed on a highly accelerated schedule."

cancel ×

550 comments

Yeah, real big secret (5, Funny)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 5 years ago | (#27995709)

Sounds like one of those open secrets like "When did the shuttle launch?"

"Sorry, it's carrying a classified military payload and we cannot comment on it."

"I heard a loud rumble at 2pm and saw a pillar of fire rising from the Cape. Was that the shuttle?"

"We can neither confirm nor deny."

"Then I'll post it on the internet."

"ZOMG!!!! Teh tarrists know everything now! Throw this man in prison!"

Re:Yeah, real big secret (5, Insightful)

shaka999 (335100) | more than 5 years ago | (#27995877)

Doesn't change the fact that he shouldn't have discussed it at all.

I'm wondering when he'll give away something that actually matters.

Re:Yeah, real big secret (5, Insightful)

je ne sais quoi (987177) | more than 5 years ago | (#27995975)

You mean kind of like exposing the identity of an active duty undercover CIA agent [wikipedia.org] ? He's got a long way to go before he can top that one.

Re:Yeah, real big secret (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996381)

She wasn't an active duty cia agent, which is why nobody was even charged, let alone convicted, of outing her.

Re:Yeah, real big secret (5, Informative)

Lensman (21605) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996623)

Scooter was charged, and convicted... [wikipedia.org] He just got his sentence commuted by Bush [wikipedia.org] (Heck of a job Scootie)

Re:Yeah, real big secret (3, Informative)

Jhon (241832) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996777)

Did you bother reading your citation?

It convicted Libby on four of the five counts against him: two counts of perjury, one count of obstruction of justice in a grand jury investigation, and one of the two counts of making false statements to federal investigators.

All the convictions were a la Martha Stewart (giving false information during an investigation). Not for some "crime" that was never established...

Re:Yeah, real big secret (5, Insightful)

moeinvt (851793) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996787)

"Fitzgerald indicted Libby on five counts: one count of obstruction of justice two counts of making false statements when interviewed by agents of the FBI, and two counts of perjury in his testimony before the grand jury."

I always wondered why it wasn't a crime to reveal the identity of an undercover CIA agent on active duty. If it IS a crime, why wasn't Libby or anyone else ever charged with that offense?

Re:Yeah, real big secret (4, Insightful)

afidel (530433) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996671)

The problem with revealing even a PAST CIA agent's identity is that every cover company they worked for and every other agent they had contact with is now exposed as well and some of THEM may be still active. It's seriously one of the few areas where 'but national security' is actually true, unlike stupid shit like taking a picture of a building which has been photographed millions of times before.

Re:Yeah, real big secret (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996759)

Wow are you stupid...

"On July 14, 2003, Washington Post journalist Robert Novak effectively ended Valerie Plame's career with the CIA (from which she later resigned in December 2005) by revealing her identity as a CIA operative in his column."

"But official legal documents published in the course of the CIA leak grand jury investigation, United States v. Libby, and Congressional investigations, fully establish her classified employment as a covert officer for the CIA at the time that Novak's column was published in July 2003."

"Waxman read a statement about Plame's CIA career that had been cleared by CIA director Gen. Michael V. Hayden and the CIA, stating that she was undercover and that her employment status with the CIA was classified information prohibited from disclosure under Executive Order 12958."

Re:Yeah, real big secret (4, Informative)

hey! (33014) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996797)

Actually, she was an active duty agent. She just wasn't stationed overseas. She has "non official cover" (that is she used her own name and identity while working for a front company). In that capacity she traveled overseas and met with foreign intelligence "assets".

Under the circumstances, she was not put in immediate danger, but anybody overseas she met with was placed in grave danger.

The reason there were no convictions was that Scooter took the fall for obstruction and perjury. Bush commuted his sentence before he spilled his guts.

Re:Yeah, real big secret (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996463)

Holy crap, at least get the facts straight. She was not undercover... no agent going in the front door of the CIA on a daily basis is considered to be undercover. Also, it was not anybody within the Bush Administration that "leaked" it to Robert Novack. Go ask Gen. Powell, he knew the guy who leaked it and yet said nothing... maybe we should prosecute him?

Re:Yeah, real big secret (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996531)

Yep, just keep using Bush as an excuse for the current administration's fuck ups. Why own up to mistakes when you can change the subject?

Re:Yeah, real big secret (2, Informative)

Jhon (241832) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996653)

I was curious why a high-ranking official in President Bill Clinton's National Security Council (NSC) was given this assignment. Wilson had become a vocal opponent of President Bush's policies in Iraq after contributing to Al Gore in the last election cycle and John Kerry in this one. During a long conversation with a senior administration official, I asked why Wilson was assigned the mission to Niger. He said Wilson had been sent by the CIA's counter-proliferation section at the suggestion of one of its employees, his wife. It was an offhand revelation from this official, who is no partisan gunslinger. When I called another official for confirmation, he said: "Oh, you know about it." The published report that somebody in the White House failed to plant this story with six reporters and finally found me as a willing pawn is simply untrue. At the CIA, the official designated to talk to me denied that Wilson's wife had inspired his selection but said she was delegated to request his help. He asked me not to use her name, saying she probably never again will be given a foreign assignment but that exposure of her name might cause "difficulties" if she travels abroad. He never suggested to me that Wilson's wife or anybody else would be endangered. If he had, I would not have used her name. I used it in the sixth paragraph of my column because it looked like the missing explanation of an otherwise incredible choice by the CIA for its mission.

That was per Novak -- the guy who noted Plame was CIA... So who leaked her ID again?

Re:Yeah, real big secret (3, Insightful)

smooth wombat (796938) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996151)

I'm wondering when he'll give away something that actually matters.

You mean like Geraldo Rivera giving away operational plans [cnn.com] of our forces when invading Iraq? You know, endangering our brave men and women as they occupy a foreign country for political purposes.

Re:Yeah, real big secret (0, Troll)

hedwards (940851) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996407)

That's pretty much complete bullshit right there. It's the job of the military to censor that sort of information. It's not his fault if the military flunky that was supposed to be handling that screwed it up.

But then again, why question it when somebody accuses the "liberal" media of doing something that the Republican party doesn't like, I mean hey, it's not like it's the responsibility of the military to censor such things.

Re:Yeah, real big secret (4, Insightful)

smooth wombat (796938) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996647)

It's the job of the military to censor that sort of information.

It was a LIVE broadcast. You think the military had the equipment necessary to do a 3-second delay for EVERY news crew that was embedded with the troops?

Further, it's known to every reporter that under no circumstances do they divulge operational information without it first being cleared by the military censors. Why Geraldo was the ONLY reporter not to understand this dictum is left as an exercise for the reader.

Re:Yeah, real big secret (5, Funny)

jgtg32a (1173373) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996281)

Granted he didn't give anything useful away. I figured the only reason anyone cared is because Biden is a senile old man and its always fun to hear them say things they aren't suppose to.

Genius (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996311)

Perhaps it's a diversion. "Yeah, we're hiding in this bunker here. Bomb this one." while all the time they're somewhere else entirely.

Re:Yeah, real big secret (4, Insightful)

hey! (33014) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996433)

I won't disagree he needs to control his mouth better. His flu remarks were just plain dumb.

On the other hand, this is no big deal. If somebody wants to target ICBMs to take out the US government's top echelon, they aren't going to skip the old naval observatory because "oh, the veep is in his secret bunker". In any case, the Bush administration pretty much spilled the beans when they had the veep's residence obscured in public imagery data sets.

You want to know where this stuff is? (5, Informative)

RingDev (879105) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996573)

Ask the pizza delivery drivers.

No joke, I was assigned to a tactical response unit while I was in the Marine Corps. I can't discuss much of the specifics, but we would get locked up in a highly secure facility just out side of Washington in case of an "emergency". The existence of the facility at the time was considered top secret.

Unfortunately, the local staff would often order out for food, and have it delivered.

So the secret wasn't all that secret, and is even less so now, seeing as how /. is posting about it.

-Rick

Re:You want to know where this stuff is? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996799)

Bullshit flag on play! This is one of the most enduring urban legends within the military and intelligence communities. Sorry. Fail.

Re:Yeah, real big secret (0, Flamebait)

penguin_dance (536599) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996767)

I'm wondering when he'll give away something that actually matters.

I suspect it will matter to HIM if we're attacked again and he has to hide in a now disclosed location.

But maybe this is just part of Obama's "open and transparent government."

Re:Yeah, real big secret (1)

moon3 (1530265) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996395)

"I don't know exactly how to put this, sir, but are you aware of what a serious breach of security that would be? I mean, he'll see everything, he'll... he'll see the Big Board!"
-- George C. Scott in "Dr. Strangelove"

Not a "big board" but still something he should not have discussed or joked about.

Re:Yeah, real big secret (2, Insightful)

MBaldelli (808494) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996593)

Sounds like one of those open secrets like "When did the shuttle launch?"

...

All this noise because he revealed one of the many cubbyholes they can stuff the President/Vice-President in when there's threats to the chain of command for the United States?

Any strategist knows that there has to be several of them; it would be completely foolish to think there's only one.

Re:Yeah, real big secret (1)

aeroseth (228594) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996731)

Poor Eleanor Clift I bet she was sure she was winning a Pulitzer prize for that news story! Big deal, everyone knows where Fort Knox is, it doesn't make it any less secure. Anybody knows where all the oil refineries are, taking a refinery out is more of a threat then offing a political leader. (just look at Iraq)

Who do people think these politicians are that we couldn't survive without them? Bah!

Always a source of amusment (5, Funny)

m0s3m8n (1335861) | more than 5 years ago | (#27995761)

Ahh, the Dem. version of Dan Quayle.

Re:Always a source of amusment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27995895)

At least Biden can spell "tomato".

Re:Always a source of amusment (3, Informative)

Theoboley (1226542) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996111)

it was "Potatoe," you insensitive clod.

Re:Always a source of amusment (5, Funny)

JamesP (688957) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996179)

So:

Tomato - Tomatoes
Potato - Potatoes
Oh No! - Oh Noes!

Re:Always a source of amusment (1, Informative)

slapout (93640) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996283)

I'm so tired of this myth of Dan Quayle not being able to spell potato. It was misspelled on the card the school gave him.

Wikipedia:
Although he was relying on cards provided by the school which included the misspelling, Quayle was widely lambasted for his apparent inability to spell the word "potato". According to his memoirs, Quayle was uncomfortable with the version he gave, but did so because he decided to trust the school's incorrect written materials.

Re:Always a source of amusment (3, Funny)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996649)

Uh, what? That's not a debunking, that's a confirmation. He needed a fucking card to spell potato? Nice work there, spanky.

Re:Always a source of amusment (4, Insightful)

JustASlashDotGuy (905444) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996029)

Ahh, the Dem. version of Dan Quayle.

Unfortunately, Biden is making Dan Quayle look like a Rhodes Scholar. Will someone please buy that man a muzzle.
I'm truly at a lose when I try to think of anything that man has brought to the ticket. He's been an embarrassment for Obama.

On the bright side, if we let him keep talking, perhaps we will all be told more about what happens at Area 51.

Re:Always a source of amusment (5, Funny)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996091)

It's assasination insurance.

Re:Always a source of amusment (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996201)

Just remember: any self-respecting king has to have a court jester. Obama's got Biden, Bush 41 had Quayle, and Cheney had Bush 43.

Re:Always a source of amusment (-1, Troll)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996643)

Just remember: any self-respecting king has to have a court jester. Obama's got Biden, Bush 41 had Quayle, and Cheney had Bush 43.

Obama is a court jestor. You can watch his teleprompter ping pong, count the urrr's and ummm's, watch him completely lose the ability to talk when the teleprompters go out, etc.

He brought the experienced old white guy (4, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996621)

Seriously. Obama had the diversity thing down. That's good, however there are many voters who that sort of thing worries. They find comfort in "experience". in politics, that means an old white guy. You can argue they shouldn't care, but they do. Yes, even democrats. That's what Biden brought. He also brought connections to special interest groups, who are powerful in terms of elections. Obama himself didn't have many of those connections, since he is a young politician. Biden on the other hand is deep within Hollywood's pocket, among others.

Now I'm sure to you these aren't bonus points and I'm not saying they are for me either. Just saying that's what they brought to Obama. McCain had the experienced, old white guy thing down. That was one thing he could sell really strongly: "I know about politics and war. I've been there, and done that. You can trust me to make decisions from a position of experience." Biden was to help balance that.

Same deal with Palin on the other side. McCain brought her in for two reasons:

1) To solidify the fundy base. The fundies were none too happy with his nomination. They wanted another fundy president and deluded themselves in to thinking the nation would go with it. So there was a real risk of losing them. No, they wouldn't vote for Obama, but they might get disenfranchised and not vote. Palin cemented them in for McCain.

2) To get the diversity vote. A young, and rather attractive, female. Goes well to deal with Obama's diversity. This is doubly true since there were women's groups that were bitter about Clinton losing. Stupid, but they really did vote for McCain because he chose a female vice president.

Of course what McCain didn't count on was that she was as big a nit wit as she is, and that the press would give her so much play. Normally vice presidents are rather non-entities. They are picked for the reason I stated: To make the president look good in various ways with various groups. However the media really let Palin have it and gave her a chance to sit her foot firmly in her mouth. Gave plenty of people pause when they realized how crazy she was.

Re:Always a source of amusment (4, Insightful)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996265)

>>Ahh, the Dem. version of Dan Quayle.

Basically. While the sympathetic media reports them as "gaffes" if any Republican said half the stuff that he did, he'd have a lower reputation than Quayle.

Seriously, google "Biden Gaffes".

Re:Always a source of amusment (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996409)

It's actually a more interesting issue than you might think. Fox News would certainly like the image of Biden to be a lightweight gaffe-prone goof, while MSNBC would like the image of Biden to be a devoted father and promoter of a better rail transportation system who knows how to work the Senate floor.

I have to think a similar dual effect happened with regards to Dan Quayle. At the same time, none of Biden's gaffes have suggested that he can't spell.

So... (4, Funny)

jayhawk88 (160512) | more than 5 years ago | (#27995829)

Does anyone currently have the job of following Biden around at all times with a tape player handy, ready to play the "Whaaah whaaah whhhaaaaaaahhhhh" sound whenever it's needed? Because that sounds like it would be a sweet gig.

Re:So... (5, Funny)

Loko Draucarn (398556) | more than 5 years ago | (#27995911)

He's the Vice President of the United States.

Surely they can spring for an actual trombonist.

Re:So... (3, Funny)

Spazztastic (814296) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996225)

Surely they can spring for an actual trombonist.

I believe they're actually called tromboners.

Re:So... (1)

jav1231 (539129) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996837)

heh You said "boners."

Re:So... (1)

tavaryn (594586) | more than 5 years ago | (#27995915)

I hereby nominate myself for this position, and I'll even throw in Yakety Sax and the failure sound from The Price Is Right for free!

Still Better than Chaney (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27995887)

This documentary [hulu.com] shows you why Joe Biden is still a better vice president than Dick Chaney.

Re:Still Better than Chaney (-1, Troll)

cashman73 (855518) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996069)

Plus, do you really think Sarah Palin would've been a better Veep than Biden? She probably would've tried to convince us to move the VP secret hideout to Wasilla, Alaska, because, you know, she can see Russia from there [youtube.com] .

Re:Still Better than Chaney (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996447)

Yet another example of how stupid the people are that keep saying that Gov Palin said it, in this example we even have a title that show it was a Saturday Night Live skit.

Re:Still Better than Chaney (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996733)

Uhh... The SNL skit was parodying an answer that Sarah Palin actually gave.

Sarah Palin's answer was more disturbing and less slightly less funny than the SNL parody, but it's substance was the same.

citation provided [youtube.com]

Linking hulu... (1)

denzacar (181829) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996637)

...is like saying "this video I saw" to about 95% of humans on planet Earth.

0% of valuable information.

So? (4, Insightful)

revscat (35618) | more than 5 years ago | (#27995903)

Even if this is accurate -- which, given the source, I kinda doubt -- so freakin' what? Looks like /. is taking a page from the Fark playbook and posting flamebait worthy articles to drum up page clicks.

Re:So? (3, Insightful)

Lightwarrior (73124) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996039)

It's a big deal if he divulged information that was actually classified. The nature of the information is less important.

Re:So? (2, Informative)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996645)

except its not, its been well known for 6 years that there was a bunker there. The BBC even reported on its construction and they had to pay damaged for blasting. In fact in all honesty pretty much everyone, even the badguys know there are bunkers under the residence of major staff members. The secret is how to get to them what kind of security they have, not that they exist.

Re:So? (1)

Megaweapon (25185) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996513)

+1. Taco must be fishing for clicks to post this tripe outside of the already worthless "Politics" section.

Government Transparency (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27995931)

Now THAT is how government transparency is done!

Old USNO ? (2, Insightful)

mbone (558574) | more than 5 years ago | (#27995961)

The old US Naval Observatory was located in Foggy Bottom [navy.mil] , just across from where the Kennedy Center is now. If you are coming in from Virginia across the Roosevelt Bridge, you can see at one point the old dome for the 26 inch telescope, where Hall discovered the moons of Mars.

This site is now the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery for the Navy. I bet that the article is referring to a bunker at Observatory Circle.

I wonder what his Secret Service nickname is? (0, Flamebait)

chill (34294) | more than 5 years ago | (#27995965)

"Tricky Dick" has been used, and it certainly doesn't fit this guy.

"What a fucking moron" fits, but it is too generic. You could be referring to almost everyone in the Federal government.

"Dopey" might be a nice fit. Maybe we can get Disney to sue him for copyright violation.

Suggestions?

Re:I wonder what his Secret Service nickname is? (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996197)

I have a buddy, his father is retired SS. At a BBQ a couple weeks ago, he referred to him as "plugs". Of course, he also referred to "nig-nog", so take it with a grain of salt.

Re:I wonder what his Secret Service nickname is? (1)

aardwolf64 (160070) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996287)

I've always thought he looks like a good Sith Lord. Is "Sith Lord Stupid" taken???

Re:I wonder what his Secret Service nickname is? (1)

bradgoodman (964302) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996473)

We (my family) call him "Fishy Joe" - which comes from the purveyor of a fast-food seafood chain on Futurama.

So? (0)

thewiz (24994) | more than 5 years ago | (#27995979)

Look, it doesn't matter if the whole world knows where Biden's hideout is; after all, if there is a nuclear attack on the east coast not much will be left.

Haven't any of you been playing Fallout 3?

Re:So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996679)

No, because fallout 3 is an abomination.

Nice to see them carrying another torch... (1)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996019)

Clearly the Bush Administration's respect for classified information has continued in the Obama Administration!

(For the sarcasm-impaired, I DO know that the Bush Administration had no more respect for classified information than Biden is demonstrating here.)

Re:Nice to see them carrying another torch... (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996099)

Do you have any instructions for the people that got the irony but still think your comment sucked?

Re:Nice to see them carrying another torch... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996247)

Oooh- burn. Mind if I write that down for later use?

Huh? (5, Insightful)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996033)

Somehow it's a major gaffe and security lapse to let on that there's a secure bunker under the official residence of the Vice President? I think if you'd asked me if there was one before reading this story, I'd just have assumed so.

Sorry, this is making a story out of basically nothing. I think Biden's kind of a putz sometimes, but this is just kinda bullshitty.

Re:Huh? (5, Insightful)

ceejayoz (567949) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996193)

Yeah, what next... revealing the existence of a secret bunker under the White House?!

Fair and Balanced (1)

carou (88501) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996119)

Yes, if there's one North American politician of the last decade who's been well-known for his verbal gaffes, the first name to leap to mind is of course none other than Joe Biden.

Title title is wrong (5, Insightful)

mikemulvaney (24879) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996137)

It should read, "Biden reveals location of Vice President's House". I lived in DC for a long time, and I'm pretty sure every one there knows where the Vice President lives.

This is the worst article I've seen on slashdot in a long time. Not only is the content nonsensical, most of the submission is copied directly from the foxnews "article", but it doesn't have quotes around the copied text.

Re:Title title is wrong (5, Insightful)

Keebler71 (520908) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996749)

Except the article says "old Naval Observatory" which is about 2 miles from the new Naval Observatory where the VP lives.

Just imagine (1)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996173)

That's nothing. Just imagine what Cheney didn't tell us!

and Cheney and Osama Ben Laden are... (2, Funny)

BrentRJones (68067) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996227)

down there right now playing poker and smoking weed

Stupid article (5, Interesting)

DnemoniX (31461) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996237)

Excuse me, but it isn't a secret when EVERYONE already knows guys. If you didn't know, you must have missed the news regarding all of the construction at the house when Dick was in residence. All of the neighbors complaining about the round the clock heavy equipment use making the ground shake. That is when everyone was saying that they were probably expanding/renovating the bunker under the house.

But hey, keep the non-news coming.

Open Secret is right (5, Informative)

gfineman (742243) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996241)

Open secret is right. I live about three quarters of a mile from the Naval Observatory and the government had to pay for damage, caused by the blasting, to the foundations of nearby residences (including at least one embassy). The local community governmental organization gathered and disseminated the procedures for getting such payments. Why is this considered news and even in Slashdot?

Re:Open Secret is right (2, Insightful)

hedwards (940851) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996595)

To be fair and balanced. We made fun of the Bush administration for being incompetent on secrets, so we have to make fun of the Obama administration for similar reasons.

It's sort of like when the press pretends like the opposition to rights for GLBT is based upon something other than pure bigotry or that there's a constitutional protection for interfering in other people's lives for bigoted reasons.

You call that a leak?! (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996253)

Here in the UK, HM Gov has so many holes in its' intelligence services that council-employed signmakers [goodexperience.com] know where our shelters are!

That's what they *want* us to think (1)

Snorfalorpagus (1321189) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996277)

Better than having your enemy not know where you are is to have them *think* they know where you are.

Consider the source... (1, Insightful)

rnturn (11092) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996279)

The report did come from Faux News, after all. They're not exactly known for their impartiality. When was the last time they reported anything positive about a Democrat? (Other than a story about a Democrat that disagrees with the majority of other Democrats.)

Re:Consider the source... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996561)

Hey genius:

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2009/05/15/shining-light-on-cheney-s-hideaway.aspx

Re:Consider the source... (1)

dinsdale3 (579466) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996717)

As opposed to the last time CNN/MSNBC/NBC/ABC/CBS/PBS reported anything positive about a Republican? (Other than a story about a Republican that disagrees with the majority of other Republicans.)

Re:Consider the source... (1, Troll)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996835)

You don't really speak French, do you?

Faux is not pronounced like "Fox", it's pronounced "Foe". It's not a witty play on words, it's a public demonstration of your ignorance about the words you use.

It didn't have a secure bunker before? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996297)

WTF? I would have expected it to have had a secure bunker installed a long time ago. I don't mean Greenbrier type bunker but something substantial that would take care of the most obvious emergencies.

Since when was it secret? (1)

saleenS281 (859657) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996399)

If the bbc could figure out it was there from reporters on the ground [bbc.co.uk] , outside of a secure zone, I'm fairly certain Russia, China, et al., knew exactly what was going on from spy satellites. You know... the people that this would actually be relevant to.

Hmmm (1)

C_Kode (102755) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996467)

$10 says he isn't Obama's running mate next election.

not so secret, and not so secure (4, Informative)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996483)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2559617.stm [bbc.co.uk] Seems the BBC revealed the "secret" location long before Biden. Yet another Fox news lets make a story out of nothing event.

Not surprising (1)

Ma8thew (861741) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996493)

I'd be more surprised if there weren't a bunker under the VP's residence.

Every preseident needs one. (2, Insightful)

CHK6 (583097) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996503)

Every US president needs that distraction factor. It's a secret unwritten part of the job. While the president is riding the bull of congress, there is still the need for a rodeo clown to distract both the news audience and maybe the bull for a second or two. They can't distract entirely as the main event unfolds, but they are still an essential part of the entertainment and distraction needed.

News has already reported there was a bunker (1)

Kagato (116051) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996525)

When the reports of neighbors complaining there was dynamite being set off at the residence for construction everyone pretty much knew it was for a bunker. It's been assume for 6 years now.

Made by vault-tech (3, Funny)

FictionPimp (712802) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996535)

Is this the vault where all the clones go nuts and kill everyone or the one with the virus that makes all the super mutants?

And this is a problem, how? (1)

Ancient_Hacker (751168) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996567)

And this is a problem, how?

Did anyone think there was NOT some nearby secure location?

Now if he'd added "and of course there are three escape tunnels surfacing at hidden helipads at X, Y, and Z," THEN maybe it would be a goof.

Re:And this is a problem, how? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996683)

Secret helipads? You mean like, grassy knolls?

Biden reveals what everyone has already known... (1)

GottliebPins (1113707) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996615)

that he's an idiot.

Basement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996655)

Wait, the vaunted 'undisclosed location' is just the basement of the vice president's normal house?

I'm sure this is the sign (1)

up2ng (110551) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996669)

I'm sure these were the signs to where he was talking about !
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01211/2712signs5_1211111i.jpg [telegraph.co.uk] or was it this one http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0gCDgR3gVP9B6/610x.jpg [daylife.com] . Both are totally safe for work


What a dumbass

Bindens apperent inablity to lie is interesting (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996697)

I find his honestly refreshing.

I just forgot about the Bailout and the Swine Flu! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996795)

Leave it to the media to keep my ape mind entertained and mesmerized!

logic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27996807)

Biden tells a handful of people, Newsweek does a blog entry on it, FOX posts a news story on their site about it. Who is the biggest leaker here?

Doest it matter? (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996809)

I mean who would want to kidnap or kill that guy anyway? He's a worthless decoration. It would be like stealing the picture on the wall when you're inside Fort Knox. ^^
Besides, when you'd abduct him, he might trip and fall over himself, dying in the process. Who would want to clean up all the dimensions of that mess? ^^

He'd be perfectly safe, sitting right next to Osama and the forty holy warriors.

Much ado about nothing (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996817)

Anyone with the resources and willingness to make an attempt on the VP's life would have known this. Just because YOU didn't know doesn't make this some awful security breach.

BTW, we also have secure bunkers under the White House. ZOMG!!!

Reflections on those who elect Politicians (2, Insightful)

BoRegardless (721219) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996819)

With a "dumb" electorate, you get "leaders" who have little or no training in economics, business, international relations or governance. Thus we get people who often have money or married it and smile enough in good looking cloths with cute one sentence sound bites to amuse people who get their news & "analysis" in one sentence sound bites and the electorate then ELECT those, hmm, 'political actors'. We should not be surprised at the empty heads in WDC. Rather to be expected.

Where is the douche tag? (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 5 years ago | (#27996825)

This guy is like another Quayle.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...