Beta
×

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!

CIA Launches WTF To Investigate Wikileaks

CmdrTaco posted more than 2 years ago | from the that's-just-adorable dept.

Government 402

krou writes "In an effort to investigate the impact of the leaked diplomatic cables, the CIA have launched the Wikileaks Task Force, commonly referred to at CIA headquarters as 'WTF.' 'The Washington Post said the panel was being led by the CIA's counter-intelligence centre, although it has drawn in two dozen members from departments across the agency.' Although the agency has not seen much of its own information leaked in the cables, some revelations (such as spying at the UN) originated from direct requests by the CIA. The Guardian notes that, 'WTF is more commonly associated with the Facebook and Twitter profiles of teenagers than secret agency committees. Given that its expanded version is usually an expression of extreme disbelief, perhaps the term is apt for the CIA's investigation.'"

cancel ×

402 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

This is what they should start doing (5, Funny)

devxo (1963088) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640450)

Personally I'm waiting for CIA to also launch an task force called NWO, just to have some fun with conspiracy theories.

Re:This is what they should start doing (3, Funny)

Dracos (107777) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640484)

Of course, this NWO stands for No Wikileaks Online.

Re:This is what they should start doing (0, Offtopic)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640618)

Random Question?

Can I change my name to WTF6502? ;-)

Re:This is what they should start doing (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640922)

No, but you can change your name to WTF1138 :)

Re:This is what they should start doing (0)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641300)

(Score:0)

Sorry for offending everyone.

FML (1)

malignant_minded (884324) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640546)

NWO is small potatoes. Its the FML that I'm really concerned about

Re:This is what they should start doing (2)

God'sDuck (837829) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640552)

I'm waiting for the inappropriate jokes at the kick-off dinner to toast the future success of the unit: the WTFFTWNSFWBBQ.

Re:This is what they should start doing (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34641262)

The will probably do that under the Langley Meeting of Affiliated Organizations (LMAO).

Re:This is what they should start doing (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640556)

Or how about powerful american politicians forming an organisation calling for US global dominion? And call it something like "project for the new american century"? That would really wind up those conspiracy jerks. http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

Re:This is what they should start doing (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640664)

Powerful american politicians? It was a group of pundits, none of whom have ever held public office. Oh, and they closed down 4 years ago. And their goal was never US global domination. Nice (though weird and random) troll.

Re:This is what they should start doing (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640892)

That's not the case. Many politicians and public officials were members of the PNAC. Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Doug Feith, and Richard Pearle to name a few. And they didn't close down so much as change their name. They are now called the Foreign Policy Initiative IIRC. It was a weird and random troll though.

Wait, wait, wait. (5, Informative)

FreonTrip (694097) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641020)

Look at the signatories on this page [archive.org] , and tell me with a straight face that none of them have held public office.

Re:This is what they should start doing (4, Informative)

khallow (566160) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641026)

Powerful american politicians? It was a group of pundits, none of whom have ever held public office.

Some of their more famous writings had input from and were signed by genuine powerful US politicians who ended up serving in the G. W. Bush administration, such as Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz.

Federal Acronym Research Team (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640688)

Brought to you by the Federal Acronym Research Team ;)

Re:This is what they should start doing (1)

Megane (129182) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641252)

Also the "Looking Out for Leaks" task force.

first (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640454)

first

Re:fist (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640640)

fist

Re:fist (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640734)

piss

Re:fist (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640778)

bad luck fist fuck

I'm confused (5, Funny)

The Creator (4611) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640470)

"CIA's counter-intelligence centre"

I can't decide if this is redundant or an oxymoron.

Re:I'm confused (5, Funny)

by (1706743) (1706744) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640712)

"CIA's counter-intelligence centre"

I can't decide if this is redundant or an oxymoron.

You know, intelligence about marble top counters, hardwood counters, laminate counters, etc.

Re:I'm confused (5, Informative)

gadzook33 (740455) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641338)

There actually is a company in the Langley area called Counter Intelligence that does this. You occasionally see their van driving around.

Re:I'm confused (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640784)

It's practically a palindrome. Let's call it "anti-intelligence" and refer to it as CIAAIC.

Re:I'm confused (3, Funny)

operagost (62405) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640786)

You mean the Central Intelligence Agency's Counter Intelligence Center? I hear they're snooping your NIC card and reading your PIN number when you enter it at an ATM machine.

Re:I'm confused (1)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640910)

Does that mean they're also tracking me using a GPS system?

Re:I'm confused (0)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640950)

No, but they are stealing the VIN number off your car.

Re:I'm confused (1)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641114)

I really hope they're not storing all this info in PDF format.

Re:I'm confused (2)

corbettw (214229) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641350)

Yo dawg, I hurd you like intelligence, so I put an intelligence in your intelligence so you can spy when you spy.

Re:I'm confused (1)

Midnight Thunder (17205) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641044)

"CIA's counter-intelligence centre"

I can't decide if this is redundant or an oxymoron.

Nah, this is more in the same vain as "Intelligent Design". It is about CIA being against intelligence.

Really? People are surprised? (-1)

chemicaldave (1776600) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640476)

Given that its expanded version is usually an expression of extreme disbelief, perhaps the term is apt for the CIA's investigation.

This really shouldn't surprise anybody. An organization aids a person in obtaining classified documents and the CIA investigates? Preposterous!

Re:Really? People are surprised? (4, Insightful)

beakerMeep (716990) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640526)

Not surprised, but did they aid in obtaining them? I got the impression they aided in publishing, but that Manning obtained them all on his own.

Re:Really? People are surprised? (0, Troll)

chemicaldave (1776600) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640588)

Not surprised, but did they aid in obtaining them? I got the impression they aided in publishing, but that Manning obtained them all on his own.

There is reason to believe that Assange provided Manning with instructions and a means to submit the documents. He had nothing to do with actually getting them. This wasn't a case of "Here, Wikileaks, have these documents." It was more like "Wikileaks, help me submit these." The government is operating under the assumption that Manning didn't submit the documents like everyone else and wait for Wikileaks to find it. Rather, Wikileaks knew what was coming and helped Manning submit them. This is in contrast to an oft cited example, the Pentagon Papers, where Daniel Elsberg handed them documents without the journalists knowing what it was.

Re:Really? People are surprised? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640668)

Just what would that "reason to believe" be? I have seen absolutely no evidence supporting your claim, and I've been following this whole thing very closely.

Re:Really? People are surprised? (5, Insightful)

aeroelastic (840614) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640732)

I don't understand what you're getting at. First you say :

An organization aids a person in obtaining classified documents

then you say

He had nothing to do with actually getting them

Which are contradictory. You also said

They have chat logs implicating Assange in aiding Bradley Manning with submitting the documents. The law is pretty clear about these things

which clearly isn't true. The law here is very murky, and "aiding in submitting documents" probably isn't a crime. If there was a clear crime comitted here, we'd have heard specifically what it is by now.

Re:Really? People are surprised? (3, Informative)

chemicaldave (1776600) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640826)

The law here is very murky, and "aiding in submitting documents" probably isn't a crime. If there was a clear crime comitted here, we'd have heard specifically what it is by now.

When I said "aids a person in obtaining classified documents" I really mean "aids Wikileaks in obtaining documents FROM Manning." Nobody thinks Assange had a hand in actually obtaining the documents from the government. But there's reason to believe he helped Manning submit the documents based on chats Manning had with the hacker who exposed him. Based on these, Assange provided Manning with locations and instructions on how to submit the documents to Wikileaks instead of submitting them like everyone else and waiting for Wikileaks to sift through the submissions, and the timeline from when Manning had the documents to when Wikileaks released them supports this claim.

I don't want people to think I don't support Wikileaks or agree wholeheartedly with the government. I'm trying to look at this from a neutral perspective based on details of the investigation released thus far and based on the law. But once again, slashtards see something they disagree with and mark it -1 Troll.

Re:Really? People are surprised? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640886)

There may be reason to believe that Wikileaks helped Manning, but Wikileaks != Assange.

Re:Really? People are surprised? (2, Insightful)

Carewolf (581105) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640874)

I don't understand what you're getting at.

He is trying to restate, the official excuse for why wikileaks is considered to have engaged in criminal activities, as his own opinion.

What you think of people who for some reason needs to pretend to think for themselves when they verbatime restate official statements, I will let you decide.

Re:Really? People are surprised? (1)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641082)

"There is reason to believe that Assange provided Manning with instructions and a means to submit the documents"

It's true. It's called the 'submissions' webpage.

Re:Really? People are surprised? (1)

rtb61 (674572) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641118)

There is a substantial deference between, hey wikileaks how do I submit these documents and hey wikileaks how do i obtain these documents. In point of fact in the first case the documents are unsubstantiated documents until they are submitted and of course once published they can not be defined as factual by anyone else the 'oops' US government.

So CIA will no play the propaganda game, denial, obfuscation and, misinformation. Pretty much the same stuff that was already indicated in a lot of the documents.

To be clear the stupidest the US government could ever do in the first place was to admit the documents released were real, dumb, dumb, dumb. I know, difficult to deny, but certainly easy no to admit to. This at least enables the challenging of any individual document as being true or valid, dumb, dumb, dumb. In fact the US government did everything imaginable to validate the documents, international diplomatic pressure, corporate strong arm tactics, ramping up of criminal charges, political rah rah with talks of execution, dumb, dumb, dumb.

So counter intelligence in every sense of the word in every facet of the US government. Hint, here's how to lie next time, some documents were released by a foreign source who has tainted and altered them, for political and economic reasons. Most of the documents released were inconsequential and yet still altered here are some examples and the rest are just fabrications based upon the wording of those other unimportant documents. See no terrorism, no executions, no extraordinary renditions, no diplomatic rubbish, no threats of prosecution and you bust the leak for inappropriate access to a secured computer network not espionage, so still admitting nothing.

In all the private contractor bullshit and politics, US intelligence services have become really clumsy and stupid, dumb, dumb, dumb.

Re:Really? People are surprised? (3, Insightful)

captainpanic (1173915) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640698)

Given that its expanded version is usually an expression of extreme disbelief, perhaps the term is apt for the CIA's investigation.

This really shouldn't surprise anybody. An organization aids a person in obtaining classified documents and the CIA investigates? Preposterous!

So, the primary question should still be: Is wikileaks considered the leak itself, or is Wikileaks considered journalism which doesn't fit in the standard state propaganda (but should still be legal under the freedom of speech laws).
I thought that the leak was in the US army, not outside hackers... Anyway, they might as well broaden the investigation to all media?

CIA launches MTF, Media Task Force, to investigate the impact of a well-informed population.

Re:Really? People are surprised? (5, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640718)

The only organization that aided Bradley Manning in obtaining classified documents was U.S. army intelligence. He was sitting in Bagdad browsing diplomatic cables from every embassy in the world, none of which had anything to do with the type of intelligence he was supposed to be gathering. There was no hacking involved.

Bradley Manning:
“I would come in with music on a CD-RW labeled with something like ‘Lady Gaga,’ erase the music then write a compressed split file,” he wrote. “No one suspected a thing and, odds are, they never will.” “I listened and lip-synced to Lady Gaga’s ‘Telephone’ while exfiltrating possibly the largest data spillage in American history,” he added later. ”Weak servers, weak logging, weak physical security, weak counter-intelligence, inattentive signal analysis … a perfect storm.”

The US military basically left a $100 bill laying on the bar while they went to the bathroom and some lowly PFC found it and did what anyone would have in his situation. Now they are trying to pretend like this worldwide network of thieves dropped in like ninjas and snatched it from their 3ft thick titanium safe.

Think for a second on what Mr. Mannings goal was... informing the public. Now think of how easily it would be for a foreign security agency or even a terrorist sympathizer to achieve the same level of clearance. Their goals would be far less noble, and far less public. They'd most likely never get caught. Bradley Manning has probably done more to help secure the US Militarys network than any idiot at the CIA that doesn't even know what the acronym WTF stands for.

Re:Really? People are surprised? (1)

erroneous (158367) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640872)

Yeah, Gary McKinnon helped with some of that stuff too. Where did that get him?

Re:Really? People are surprised? (1)

Blue6 (975702) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641328)

The problem is everyone sees the word classified and assumes it must be important, that is not always the case. Just because it is classified does not mean that reveling it would have an impact on U.S. national security. For example, the number of rolls of toilet paper bought for a unit every month maybe classified, due to the fact you could potentially determine unit size and strength from the number. However, it has no impact on the overall National Security of the U.S. The fact that he is a PFC. means nothing either everyone in the military has the equivalent of a secret clearance it does not mean they have access to anything of importance though. It is just poor journalism and over excitement by Wikileaks in thinking, they have something valuable because it is stamped classified. Nothing of real importance was released in regards to national security, but it sure has helped to feed the ego of someone that seems to crave the spotlight.

Re:Really? People are surprised? (4, Insightful)

DrXym (126579) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641344)

What's more incredible is that no one noticed this. I've worked in places where you just know there are triggers on certain tables, that queries are logged, that you can and probably would trip alarms of you did something prohibited such as looking up celeb details, or someone's medical records without authorisation.

It beggars belief that any intel officer could do the equivalent to "select * from reports" and nobody batted an eyelid. If he had to search a database, he should be required to enter search criteria. Results should be limited. His search should be logged. Unusual or suspicious searches should flagged for immediate attention. Even the text of the reports could even tagged in obvious and less obvious ways so if they did leak that the culprit could be forensically identified.

So while we can debate about the ethics of what wikileaks is doing, the reality is that the fault for all the leaks lays fairly and squarely at the feet of the US governments sloppy security. If Bradly Manning was doing it then who else was? I wonder if China, Russia, Iran etc. have had to feign surprise at these leaks. Perhaps they've long owned their own copies.

WTF stands for... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640478)

Welcome To Facebook, of course!

Let me be the first to say... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640480)

Let me be the first to say LOL

WTF? (4, Insightful)

mcvos (645701) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640490)

But seriously, this sounds like a much more sensible approach than many other US responses we've seen so far.

Re:WTF? (1)

milonssecretsn (1392667) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640654)

CIA WTF FTW! OMG!

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34641000)

BBQ

WTF? (-1, Redundant)

satuon (1822492) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640494)

What the fuck?

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640518)

What the fuck?

Yeah, they address that in the article.

And ....nevermind.

More leakage (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640508)

I hope the WTF internal memos don't end up appearing on Wikileaks as it could cause the creation of a WTFTF: task force recursion.

Idiots (4, Insightful)

santax (1541065) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640512)

First they give 3 million people access to this information and then they complain at a guy that has nothing to do with it. Given the way the US threats people I am sure that the poor soldier who has been in isolation for months has gotten 'an offer he can't refuse' to sign a fake testimony against Assange. The weirdest part about this all is that half the population seems to believe the threat of terrorism is coming from some Muslims living in the desert. Totally blind for the real terrorism we face everyday, put in place by the so called government. Don't believe? Start a blog, become a journalist or try to get on an airplane without having some dick take a look at your dick, or even worse, your 5-y/o dick. Terrorism from Muslims can be a threat, however, the only terrorism I actually witness everyday is from white guys in suits.

Re:Idiots (0, Troll)

chemicaldave (1776600) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640550)

First they give 3 million people access to this information and then they complain at a guy that has nothing to do with it. Given the way the US threats people I am sure that the poor soldier who has been in isolation for months has gotten 'an offer he can't refuse' to sign a fake testimony against Assange.

Testimony? They don't need testimony. They have chat logs implicating Assange in aiding Bradley Manning with submitting the documents. The law is pretty clear about these things. We'll just have to wait for his trial.

Re:Idiots (5, Insightful)

santax (1541065) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640592)

Yeah I'm sure they have chat-logs. Found those probably next to the WMD's in Iraq.

Re:Idiots (4, Insightful)

mrsteveman1 (1010381) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640594)

They have chat logs implicating Assange in aiding Bradley Manning with submitting the documents. The law is pretty clear about these things. We'll just have to wait for his trial.

That isn't the same thing as assisting someone in stealing classified information.

Re:Idiots (0)

chemicaldave (1776600) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640666)

They have chat logs implicating Assange in aiding Bradley Manning with submitting the documents. The law is pretty clear about these things. We'll just have to wait for his trial.

That isn't the same thing as assisting someone in stealing classified information.

Correct, but it's also different than the role most news outlets play, which is the ignorant journalist. Assange likely knew of the documents and helped Manning submit them. That's how the government is operating in this investigation. So, like I said, we'll just have to wait for a trial to see what the courts say about it. How far can a media outlet go in obtaining classified information? The answer is likely to be "zilch, media cannot knowingly obtain classified documents."

Re:Idiots (1)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640816)

If someone mails classified documents to a newspaper, and the newspaper wasn't expecting them, the newspaper isn't guilty of anything. If someone calls the newspaper and and paper provides their address to send them classified documents, is the newspaper breaking a law? I don't know the laws involved, but I doubt it.

Re:Idiots (0)

chemicaldave (1776600) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640920)

If someone mails classified documents to a newspaper, and the newspaper wasn't expecting them, the newspaper isn't guilty of anything. If someone calls the newspaper and and paper provides their address to send them classified documents, is the newspaper breaking a law? I don't know the laws involved, but I doubt it.

The question would be, does the newspaper know that it's getting classified documents?

Re:Idiots (1)

mrsteveman1 (1010381) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640968)

That doesn't appear matter at the moment, so unless the law changes..

Re:Idiots (2)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641156)

"...and helped Manning submit them."

Yes, he even gave him military grade encryption and lots of tips on how to protect himself.
Like they give to EVERYBODY!

http://www.wikileaks.lu/submissions.html [wikileaks.lu]

Re:Idiots (4, Interesting)

Knuckles (8964) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640670)

Testimony? They don't need testimony. They have chat logs implicating Assange in aiding Bradley Manning with submitting the documents. The law is pretty clear about these things. We'll just have to wait for his trial.

If you mean this [nytimes.com] , then what they have are chat logs of Manning telling Lamo that Assange helped him with the upload to WL. Read the article. This is very different to Assange helping Manning to *obtain* the documents, and while IANAL it appears that helping to publish secret documents as such is not a crime. And Assange claims not to have any contact with Manning.

A trial may bring some light into it, but as far as the Manning case shows it appears that the US military prefers to torture its soldiers instead of shedding light by a speedy trial. And Assange is neither a US citizen nor is he located in the US, so I still fail to see why he should be subject to US laws.

Re:Idiots (1)

Knuckles (8964) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640682)

Ooops, I messed up the quote tags. Should have been.

Testimony? They don't need testimony. They have chat logs implicating Assange in aiding Bradley Manning with submitting the documents. The law is pretty clear about these things. We'll just have to wait for his trial.

Re:Idiots (2)

haggisbrain (945030) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641074)

First they give 3 million people access to this information and then they complain at a guy that has nothing to do with it. Given the way the US threats people I am sure that the poor soldier who has been in isolation for months has gotten 'an offer he can't refuse' to sign a fake testimony against Assange.

Testimony? They don't need testimony. They have chat logs implicating Assange in aiding Bradley Manning with submitting the documents. The law is pretty clear about these things. We'll just have to wait for his trial.

Incorrect, they only have chat logs between Manning and Lamo (the person who reported Manning). http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/wikileaks-chat/ [wired.com]

Re:Idiots (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34641122)

Replying as Anon so as not to undo my mods. The mods who modded you troll should be ashamed of themselves. That was nothing but suppressing a differing opinion.

Re:Idiots (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34641236)

"the law" is pretty clear about these things? The concept of "jurisdiction" certainly is. Please look it up.

Daily updates? (5, Funny)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640516)

Will there also be a website where you can get Daily WTF updates? This could be interesting. Add some crappy user commenting software are you are all set for a fun time.

Re:Daily updates? (0, Redundant)

Okind (556066) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640580)

Will there also be a website where you can get Daily WTF updates? This could be interesting. Add some crappy user commenting software are you are all set for a fun time.

You mean http://thedailywtf.com/ [thedailywtf.com] ?

Re:Daily updates? (4, Funny)

jgtg32a (1173373) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640754)

Re:Daily updates? (2)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640966)

The appropriate answer is "Woosh!". You must be new here.

Re:Daily updates? (1)

Carewolf (581105) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640884)

The daily WTF hasn't had daily updates for years... Or am I taking your joke too serious now? ;)

my eardrums! (0)

digitalsushi (137809) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640540)

the buzzing! life isn't supposed to imitate art! I gotta keep moving west or my head will explode!

April Fool's Joke? (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640570)

If this was April 1st I'd guess "yes". Who on earth thought it should be named WTF? How about LMFAO? Or like my last company:

"Safety Has Its Time" - one of the contractors won an award for that slogan; submitted it just after he received an offer to work for another company

Re:April Fool's Joke? (1)

AlterEager (1803124) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640750)

The story is that the City University of Newcastle on Tyne got as far as printing the letterhead before they decided that they needed a name change.

Re:April Fool's Joke? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34641070)

Or, after a French colleague asked if there were any more acronyms like "TGIF = Thank G-d It's Friday", a quick thinking American co-worker who doesn't like the French replied "Of course... there's Sure Happy It's Thursday".

The funny thing is that no-one bothered to tell the Frenchman what "shit" meant, and he actually used it in several emails in the department until he one day sent one out of the department and was reprimanded.

Well... (5, Funny)

d3vpsaux (587601) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640582)

I'm waiting for Operation OMGWTFBBQ myself... Oh My, Government Wikileaks Task Force Better Be Quick!

Gotta be a joke (0)

reboot246 (623534) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640626)

Somebody please tell me it's April 1st.

When they report to the white house... (0)

spectro (80839) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640648)

"Mr. President, here is the WTF report"

Led by the CIA Universal Network Team (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34640692)

Ridiculous you say. I wouldn't be surprised I say.

I could save them the effort. Nobody has been killed, no attacks carried out. The world is still pretty much the same. There are a few red faces where rich and powerful people have been shown to be the duplicitous, lying hypocrites we suspected them to be. That is what this task force is trying to prevent in future.

Re:Led by the CIA Universal Network Team (1)

Jiro (131519) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641286)

It's going to be incredibly difficult to prove that Wikileaks resulted in a death, since in practice it's just going to be one contributing factor among others--you'll always have plausible deniability and be able to claim the death was caused by one of those other factors. It'll raise the probability of death and so some people will die who wouldn't die without it--but it's going to be hard to tell which ones.

Imagine that, for instance, some terrorist uses the leaked list of targets as targets for terrorism. It would always be possible to say "maybe he would have attacked this target anyway without Wikileaks". There would be no way to definitively prove Wikileaks was responsible--even if the terrorist actually admits to using Wikileaks, his defenders could always say "if Wikileaks wasn't around he would still have chosen targets by some means". You could never prove it.

Wikileaks launches counter to WTF CIA department (0)

assemblerex (1275164) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640740)

It will be known as OMG WTF CIA

Some suggestions (4, Funny)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640818)

I could make some more suggestions:

GBT - Google Background Task-force (to look into the background data from wifi snooping)

WANK - Wide Area Network Keeper (protect infrastructure from DDOS)

SHIT - Secure Homeland IT (initiative against cyber warfare)

um... (2)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640838)

If the group can't even decode the Acronym WTF, I have serious reservations about their ability to counter the efforts of the global geek community out to get them.

"Ok 4chan, we were going to use 256-bit AES to transmit our instructions but it has recently come to our attention that if we simply use an encrytion schema called "Leetspeak" the CIA will be completely mystified and far less likely to crack the code."

***3 months later***

President Obama: "Our Military leaders and Intelligence officials have asked that I request help from the American people in our time of need. We are in desperate need of translators. Specifically in the Swedish ethic language of "LeetSpeak." The also asked me to say 'U will pwn n00b haxors" and said you'd know what that means."

Re:um... (2)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641056)

Okay, just for 38 special seconds, assume they're not dense. This is that "security through crowd-cover" on the search engines. So what do they gain by co-opting one of the top-five acronyms?

WTF may be intended to express... (3, Funny)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640896)

...the CIA's opinion of the rest of the government's computer security procedures.

WTF! (0)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640904)

WTF, not another Wikileaks story! In the spirit of the upcoming holiday season, maybe we can just forgo any more Wikileaks stories until after the New Year.

How it really happened (5, Funny)

AgentSmith (69695) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640926)

We fade in on a low lit smoky government war room.
Many high ranking CIA operatives are seated around a circular table.

Task force chairman: Gentlemen, we have our network completely set. Operatives are in place and the funding is acquired.
                                          All we need now is . . .a name.

[CIA Director walks in]

Director: Well Hey Howdy boys! What are we all up against this time?!

Task force chairman: Director, we just learned about the release of numerous secret diplomat cables from a website called Wikileaks.

Director: WHAT THE F@$K?!! NEOTHEONENSFWBBQ?!!

Task for chairman: Hmmmm. . . WTF. W. . .T . . .F . . .That's it! Gentlemen, we have our name! Congratulations, Director!

[Cheers go out. Scotch is poured and toasts are made.
Screen fades to black.]

[Fade in on Julian Assange sitting in a British pub. A CIA operative, a couple MI5 operatives with some British Bobbies come
walking in the door.]

MI5 Operative: Julian Assange?

Julian: Yes?

MI5: You are being held for extradition to Sweden under allegations of rape. Please come with us.

Julian: WTF?!

CIA Operative: [Takes off sunglasses] Exactly.

[Fade to black. Cue Credits. Roll End Theme]

How much more ridiculous does this have to get (5, Insightful)

Phoenix666 (184391) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640970)

before the American people hit the reset button on the country? The government is obviously completely out of control. We have the TSA fondling children and strip-searching innocent citizens who simply want to travel from point A to point B. We have a Congress and Whitehouse who simply can't be bothered to do anything to help the Middle Class, preferring instead to concentrate even more wealth and power in the hands of the ultra-rich, ultra-connected, unaccountable, and demonstrably incompetent (eg. tax breaks for the wealthy and net neutrality). And thanks to Wikileaks the illusion that the government knows what it's doing has been shattered.

It's almost like those in power are betting each other they can screw the American people indefinitely, unapologetically, right in front of them and no one will do anything. And amazingly, the most heavily armed populace in the world is letting them get away with it.

Is there no steel left in the American soul?

Re:How much more ridiculous does this have to get (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34641266)

No.

Sold it to the Chinese to pay their debts.

Re:How much more ridiculous does this have to get (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34641304)

You say you want a revolution
Well you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it's evolution
Well you know
We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don't you know you can count me out
Don't you know it's gonna be alright
Alright Alright

You say you got a real solution
Well you know
We'd all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well you know
We're doing what we can
But when you want money for people with minds
that hate
All I can tell you is brother you have to wait
Don't you know it's gonna be alright
Alright Alright

You say you'll change the constitution
Well you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it's the institution
Well you know
You better free your mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow
Don't you know know it's gonna be alright
Alright Alright

Re:How much more ridiculous does this have to get (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34641308)

"Is there no steel left in the American soul?"

Nope, it's all pork-fat and Twinkies now.

Either... (2)

British (51765) | more than 2 years ago | (#34640982)

..some old fogey is working at the CIA who is 100% out of touch with modern slang came up with this name. ..or.. ..someone at the CIA has a great sense of humor. ..or... ..some 4channer is an insider at the CIA and thought they would do this for the ultimate lulz. It's not unlike Fight Club where you find out members of Tyler's gang work everyday jobs and can secretly add things to your meal.

WTF? (1)

loafula (1080631) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641008)

lol!

The fine line.. (2, Interesting)

countzerobah (1963018) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641010)

People, is this really transparency? Or is this espionage? Frankly I think that all the wikileaks documents fall on the side of espionage. Allow me a minute to elaborate my position. The government, private industry, and even individuals. Have private things that they want to keep private. By law, everyone's privacy is protected. When documents that are supposed to be private are "stolen" that is espionage and theft. How would you guys like it if the content of your hard drives was stolen and then posted on the internet? How would you like it if they did it under the guise of keeping you honest? I am sure all would agree that even under this "explanation" you would still feel like and have the rights under the law that information was stolen. Yes I understand that our government has to be transparent. There are however, methods to get information in the properway. Using the law, one can subpena the governemet, private industry, and individuals. Using legal ways information can be forced to be released. So what is my point? Basically, the protections must be in place to protect everyone, lest they be excluded whimsically. Much like our right to free speech. Everyone, has the right to free speech in the US. Even people that speak with hate. Any lawyers care to chime in? 01110000 01100101 01100001 01100011 01100101

WTF? (1)

Vlijmen Fileer (120268) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641072)

What The Fuck?

Law Or Laughter? (1)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641076)

I'm just waiting until the WTF creates its sister agency, the Operational Management Governing Bureaucratic Branching Queue.

Did They Take the Docs? (1)

sherriw (794536) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641080)

Am I missing something? I thought it was some other guy, not related to Wikileaks who stole the documents? Shouldn't that guy/security hole be the target of an investigation? What's there to investigate with Wikileaks? They publish leaked documents. There, end of mystery. *sigh*

Re:Did They Take the Docs? (1)

Dakman (824764) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641264)

They're looking for anything they can to bust Wikileaks/Assange. By the way, I'm surprised no one has commented on how outrages it is that the government is spending US tax dollars this way.

Lesser of two evils (1)

srussia (884021) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641306)

It was either the Liquidate Bradley Manning brigade or this.

Source of leaks (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 2 years ago | (#34641240)

Maybe the CIA used OpenBSD. Damn those FBI agents. Damn them, I say.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>