×

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!

New Snowden Revelation: Terrorists Attempting To Infiltrate CIA

samzenpus posted about 7 months ago | from the keep-your-friends-close-and-your-enemies-closer dept.

United States 250

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

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

250 comments

No need for that anymore... (1, Troll)

Tim12s (209786) | about 7 months ago | (#44740115)

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

Re:No need for that anymore... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740171)

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

Re:No need for that anymore... (4, Interesting)

Frobnicator (565869) | about 7 months ago | (#44740175)

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

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

Re:No need for that anymore... (2)

caballew (2725281) | about 7 months ago | (#44740229)

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

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

But this was probably an approved intentional Anonymous leak.

Re:No need for that anymore... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740381)

In which case, it shouldn't be reported.

Re:No need for that anymore... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740235)

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

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

Re:No need for that anymore... (4, Insightful)

t4ng* (1092951) | about 7 months ago | (#44740633)

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

Snowden beware (5, Insightful)

jodido (1052890) | about 7 months ago | (#44740131)

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

Re:Snowden beware (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 7 months ago | (#44740163)

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

Re:Snowden beware (1)

l0ungeb0y (442022) | about 7 months ago | (#44740169)

... that would just cheapen the word

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

Re:Snowden beware (2)

petteyg359 (1847514) | about 7 months ago | (#44740359)

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

Re:Snowden beware (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44741041)

appereantly grammer nazis also infiltrated ranks of slashdot

Re:Snowden beware (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740231)

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

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

Re:Snowden beware (1)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | about 7 months ago | (#44740889)

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

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

Re:Snowden beware (0)

Brett Buck (811747) | about 7 months ago | (#44740263)

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

Re:Snowden beware (4, Informative)

PCM2 (4486) | about 7 months ago | (#44740361)

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

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

Re:Snowden beware (2)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about 7 months ago | (#44740473)

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

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

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

Re:Snowden beware (1)

number11 (129686) | about 7 months ago | (#44740741)

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

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

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

Re:Snowden beware (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740469)

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

Re:Snowden beware (2)

Guru80 (1579277) | about 7 months ago | (#44740891)

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

Re:Snowden beware (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740271)

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

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

Re:Snowden beware (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740409)

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

Re:Snowden beware (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740651)

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

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

Re:Snowden beware (1)

number11 (129686) | about 7 months ago | (#44740843)

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

True.

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

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

Paranoia... (5, Interesting)

Meditato (1613545) | about 7 months ago | (#44740141)

or actual infiltration?

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

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

Re:Paranoia... (2, Interesting)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about 7 months ago | (#44740287)

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

Re:Paranoia... (1)

broken_chaos (1188549) | about 7 months ago | (#44740387)

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

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

Re:Paranoia... (3, Interesting)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about 7 months ago | (#44740437)

From TFA:

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

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

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

I don't see the difference (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740143)

CIA, Hamas, Hezbollah, and al-Qaeda financed by the same money. Just normal flow of peple between sister terrorist organizations.

Re:I don't see the difference (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740649)

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

You know spies.... (5, Funny)

Roskolnikov (68772) | about 7 months ago | (#44740149)

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

- Sam Axe

You can't win in this job market (4, Funny)

M. Baranczak (726671) | about 7 months ago | (#44740151)

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

Snowden = superhuman? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740181)

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

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

Re: Snowden = superhuman? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740221)

Was that a MIB reference?

Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress (2)

leftover (210560) | about 7 months ago | (#44740201)

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

Re:Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress (4, Insightful)

wbr1 (2538558) | about 7 months ago | (#44740269)

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

Re:Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress (2)

Roskolnikov (68772) | about 7 months ago | (#44740275)

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

Re:Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740395)

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

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

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

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

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

Re:Better use for NSA capabilities: Watch Congress (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 7 months ago | (#44740931)

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

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

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

The terrorists are already here. (5, Insightful)

bmo (77928) | about 7 months ago | (#44740219)

Look at who signed this.

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

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

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

And really, read the rest of the PNAC site.

PNAC morphed into the Foreign Policy Initiative

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

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

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

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

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

--
BMO

Re:The terrorists are already here. (5, Insightful)

caballew (2725281) | about 7 months ago | (#44740273)

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

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

Re:The terrorists are already here. (2)

bmo (77928) | about 7 months ago | (#44740301)

Indeed.

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

--
BMO

Re:The terrorists are already here. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740755)

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

Re:The terrorists are already here. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740397)

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

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

Re:The terrorists are already here. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740545)

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

Re:The terrorists are already here. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740939)

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

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

Re:The terrorists are already here. (1)

betterprimate (2679747) | about 7 months ago | (#44740823)

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

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

Sigh.

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

Re:The terrorists are already here. (2)

MRe_nl (306212) | about 7 months ago | (#44740365)

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

Re:The terrorists are already here. (1)

betterprimate (2679747) | about 7 months ago | (#44740857)

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

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

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

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

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

Re:The terrorists are already here. (1)

number11 (129686) | about 7 months ago | (#44741005)

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

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

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

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

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

Double super secret infilitrator (1, Funny)

Ice Station Zebra (18124) | about 7 months ago | (#44740247)

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

Except ... (4, Insightful)

six025 (714064) | about 7 months ago | (#44740251)

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

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

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

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

Peace,
Andy.

Re:Except ... (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | about 7 months ago | (#44740289)

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

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

Re:Except ... (1)

king neckbeard (1801738) | about 7 months ago | (#44740519)

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

Re:Except ... (0, Troll)

cold fjord (826450) | about 7 months ago | (#44740481)

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

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

Dear Homeowner,

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

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

--- The Burglar

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

Re:Except ... (4, Insightful)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 7 months ago | (#44740989)

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

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

Re:Except ... (1)

shentino (1139071) | about 7 months ago | (#44741045)

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

Just let him get robbed

Re:Except ... (1)

geogob (569250) | about 7 months ago | (#44740509)

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

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

One in five? Really (1)

sandbagger (654585) | about 7 months ago | (#44740267)

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

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

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

Re:One in five? Really (4, Informative)

vux984 (928602) | about 7 months ago | (#44740311)

No. You misread it.

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

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

Re:One in five? Really (1)

mspohr (589790) | about 7 months ago | (#44740441)

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

Re:One in five? Really (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740323)

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

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

Re:One in five? Really (1)

Urkki (668283) | about 7 months ago | (#44740333)

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

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

Re:One in five? Really (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740577)

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

It's supposed to be that way for the president too and look what we got. Someone who's past is so full of lies and fabrications that no one really knows if he legally qualifies for the job or not.

That doesn't count any Mossad infiltrators? (1)

leftie (667677) | about 7 months ago | (#44740277)

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

That Picard facepalm here (1)

dicobalt (1536225) | about 7 months ago | (#44740307)

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

Re:That Picard facepalm here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740351)

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

Re:That Picard facepalm here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740357)

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

I guess they did that .. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740547)

and they all ended up comprising the CIA ..

Possible modus opperandi revealed? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740313)

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

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

TERRORISTS ALREADY HAVE INVADED NSA/CIA/MILITARY (1)

Seumas (6865) | about 7 months ago | (#44740315)

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

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

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

Re:TERRORISTS ALREADY HAVE INVADED NSA/CIA/MILITAR (4, Interesting)

Tablizer (95088) | about 7 months ago | (#44740349)

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

NO SUCH THING AS A TERRORIST (1)

MRe_nl (306212) | about 7 months ago | (#44740443)

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

In the end (4, Funny)

lesincompetent (2836253) | about 7 months ago | (#44740319)

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

Downloading multiple files... (1)

Savage-Rabbit (308260) | about 7 months ago | (#44740321)

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

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

"Significant" defined (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 7 months ago | (#44740329)

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

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

Re:"Significant" defined (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 7 months ago | (#44740983)

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

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

Prospects tripped up in interview questions (4, Funny)

JoeyRox (2711699) | about 7 months ago | (#44740339)

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

Re:Prospects tripped up in interview questions (2)

TeknoHog (164938) | about 7 months ago | (#44740607)

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

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

Terrorists (3, Insightful)

cphilo (768807) | about 7 months ago | (#44740375)

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

transparency (2)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about 7 months ago | (#44740425)

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

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

 

And in other news (1)

twistofsin (718250) | about 7 months ago | (#44740449)

The sky is blue.

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

Re:And in other news (4, Insightful)

mysidia (191772) | about 7 months ago | (#44740543)

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

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

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

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

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

Washington Post (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740475)

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

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

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

And this is a revelation how? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740495)

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

Even worse: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740515)

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

The Enemy Within ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740599)

is always the most insidious enemy.

the terrorists go by another name (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740723)

and that is: jews

Not exactly surprised (1)

Guru80 (1579277) | about 7 months ago | (#44740875)

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

Genetical illnesses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740897)

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

The origin of MI5/MI6 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44740949)

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

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

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

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

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

Convenient paranoia in the TLAs is not new.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...