Author Topic: Intel Matters  (Read 324057 times)




ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19835
    • View Profile
leaker found !!
« Reply #753 on: April 13, 2023, 07:35:07 AM »
https://www.yahoo.com/news/pentagon-leaks-linked-young-gun-051038221.html

funny leaker finally found (since when are leakers for the LEFT ever found)
and he is RACIST GUN ENTHUSIAST!!!!

for the LEFT => happy days are here again .

This will be carried by every msm outlet
ad nauseam for the rest of the month
till the next DJT story

[of course that said, he should be placed in front of a firing squad for what "he/she/they/them" did ]
« Last Edit: April 13, 2023, 07:53:46 AM by ccp »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile
NRO: America's Dumbest Leaker: This is the dumbest timeline
« Reply #754 on: April 14, 2023, 11:18:18 AM »


What America’s Dumbest Leaker Revealed

On the menu today: The FBI caught the leaker of the gargantuan trove of America’s intelligence secrets, and if you buy into the idea of a multiverse, where alternate dimensions play out different scenarios of history, you are likely to accept the increasingly common slogan, “This is the dumbest timeline.” It’s one thing to have our country’s secrets revealed by an ideologue such as Edward Snowden, or have some hapless schmo spill the beans to some Russian honeytrap like Anna Chapman. But no, we just had our biggest secrets revealed to the whole world by a 21-year-old Air Force National Guard tech-guy dweeb who wanted to look like an “original gangster” in front of his teenage friends on an online server.

A Devastating and Comprehensive Leak

Earlier this week, I noted that the usual response to a massive leak of classified information — enacting more restrictions upon who gets to see what intelligence, and explicitly or implicitly discouraging the sharing of information from one agency to another — inevitably leads to “stovepiping.” In fact, the Pentagon has already begun enacting new limits on who within its ranks receives its highly classified daily intelligence briefing. When critical information gets stovepiped, the U.S. government’s response to all kinds of threats from terrorists to hostile regimes gets slower and less effective.

And yet, upon learning about the details of this most recent leak . . . stovepipe away, spooks, because this sounds ridiculous:

As a newly minted member of the Massachusetts Air National Guard returned home from training, his mother took to her flower shop’s Facebook page to express pride in his accomplishments.

“Jack is on his way home today, tech school complete, ready to start his career in the Air National Guard!” said the post, dated June 3, 2021. It was accompanied by a photograph of a patriotic-themed balloon tied to a mailbox and emblazoned, “Welcome home!”

Patriotic zeal appeared common around Airman 1st Class Jack Teixeira, 21, who had followed in the footsteps of numerous family members to join the military. Teixeira, slim and boyish in photographs taken in his blue dress uniform, had been assigned to manage and troubleshoot computers and communications systems for the 102nd Intelligence Wing at Otis Air National Guard Base, according to the Air Force. . . .

While Teixeira was relatively inexperienced in the military, he had access to highly classified military intelligence through a Defense Department computer network known as the Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System, said a U.S. official familiar with the matter. The system would have allowed Teixeira to read and potentially print classified documents, though there are guidelines to handle those in accordance with the law.

A 21-year-old Air National guardsman had access to some of the biggest secrets of our intelligence community, including, but not limited to, reports stating:

The Ukrainians are on a pace to run out of air-defense missiles by May; the document stated that the Ukrainians’ “ability to provide medium range air defense to protect the [front lines] will be completely reduced by May 23. UKR assessed to withstand 2-3 more wave strikes.”
Western plans to arm and train Ukraine’s army, “including the status of nine Ukrainian brigades, the amount of armor and artillery in each one and the precise number of shells and precision-guided rockets Ukraine is firing each day.” As The Economist surmises, “If accurate, the data could allow Russian military intelligence to identify the specific brigades that have probably been tasked with breaching Russian defenses at the outset of the offensive. That, in turn, could allow Russia to carefully monitor those units to assess the location and timing of an offensive. One slide indicates that Ukraine’s 10th Corps is likely to command the operation, which will now make its headquarters an obvious Russian target. Another shows when the muddy ground is expected to harden sufficiently for heavy armored vehicles to pass over.”
U.S. intelligence agencies have “penetrated nearly every aspect of the Russian intelligence apparatus and military command structure.”
U.S. assessments that the Ukrainian counteroffensive is likely to face significant challenges and achieve limited gains in the coming year.
The Mossad encouraged Israel’s anti-Netanyahu protests.
“China approved provision of lethal aid to Russia in its war in Ukraine earlier this year and planned to disguise military equipment as civilian items.”
“The China’s People’s Liberation Army had . . . successfully tested a new hypersonic intermediate-range ballistic missile called the DF-27.”
As CNN described, “One document attributed to a signals intelligence report said that Jordan’s Foreign Ministry in late February planned to assure Beijing about its interest in a continued economic relationship, after Beijing reportedly complained that Chinese companies were not involved in the country’s 5G network rollout. Another said Nicaragua was negotiating with a Chinese company for the construction of a deepwater port on its Caribbean coast, attributing this information to signals intelligence.”
“President Abdel Fatah El-Sisi of Egypt . . . a major recipient of U.S. aid, recently ordered subordinates to produce up to 40,000 rockets to be covertly shipped to Russia.”
Information about secret conversations at the highest level of the South Korean government, revealing that the U.S. is intercepting the electronic communications of President Yoon Suk Yeol and his top aides.
Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán identified the United States as one of his party’s “top three adversaries” during a “political strategy session” on February 22.
Russian intelligence officers bragged that they had “convinced the . . . United Arab Emirates ‘to work together against US and UK intelligence agencies.’”
As the Washington Post put it, the leak involved classified information from just about every major U.S. intelligence agency: “Documents describe intelligence activities at the National Security Agency, the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, law enforcement agencies and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) — arguably the most secretive intelligence agency in the government, responsible for a multibillion-dollar constellation of spy satellites.”

Other countries’ counterintelligence agencies love information like this because it lets them know which forms of communication are being intercepted by the U.S., and then they get their governments to stop using those forms of communication. It also helps them figure out who among their ranks is revealing or selling information to our spies.

Teixeira was a “cyber transport systems specialist” — in other words, he was one of the computer guys. The U.S. Air Force touts that job: “Whether it’s repairing a network hub at a stateside base or installing fiber-optic cable at a forward installation overseas, these experts keep our communications systems up and running and play an integral role in our continuing success.”

Teixeira was assigned to the 102nd Intelligence Wing of the Massachusetts Air National Guard, stationed at Otis Air National Guard Base on Cape Cod. It is very far from clear as to why Teixeira would have or need so much access to so much classified information to perform his duties; obviously, no one noticed or paid attention to the information he was accessing.

Over in The Atlantic, Juliette Kayyem, a former homeland-security adviser to former Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick who helped oversee the state’s Air National Guard, says she can’t understand it, either. “Based on my experience, I am at a loss to explain why a 21-year-old member of the state intelligence wing, who does not appear to have been working in any federal capacity, would need access to the kind of materials whose release has so unnerved the Pentagon and supporters of the Ukrainian war effort. . . . It stretches any notion of homeland defense to think a low-level state Air Guard member should have access to materials about a war that the United States is not actively fighting and that poses no domestic risk.”

Teixeira was no whistle-blower, nor is there any evidence at this point that he was being influenced, blackmailed, or strong-armed by any foreign intelligence service. No, he’s just stupid, and he wanted to look like a big deal in front of his peers on a Discord chat server. His chosen online initials “OG” likely mean “original gangster,” a slang term for someone who’s incredibly exceptional, authentic, or “old-school.” I will remind you that this “original gangster” only recently became old enough to legally purchase alcohol.

President Biden said on Thursday that while he was concerned sensitive government documents had been leaked, “there’s nothing contemporaneous that I’m aware of that is of great consequence.”

This is an attempt at spin so ludicrously inaccurate it raises questions about Biden’s understanding of what happened. The Ukrainians had to alter some of their battle plans for the counteroffensive because of this leak; Ukraine’s top intelligence official lamented, “Russia is the only beneficiary of this.”

Either President Biden is lying his butt off, they’re not briefing him on all of the details, or he can’t remember what he was told in his briefings. Or some variation of all three.

ADDENDUM: From the Washington Post’s report: “The photos of documents posted online included a trail of clues, with items in the background that included Gorilla Glue, a Boston Red Sox hat, and hunting magazines.”

New York Yankees fans this morning: “I knew it.”

I was going to make a joke that while Red Sox fans spill national secrets, Yankees fans kill dictators such as Moammar Qaddafi, but that is apparently not the case. At this time, the preferred baseball team of the man who killed Qaddafi remains unknown.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #756 on: April 16, 2023, 08:27:54 PM »
You are beginning to scare me GM.  I am now at the point where that sounds plausible , , ,




Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile
George Friedman: A convocation of spies
« Reply #760 on: June 06, 2023, 03:16:26 AM »
Not how I see things, but GF is a very smart guy:
=================================

June 6, 2023
View On Website
Open as PDF

    
A Convocation of Spies
By: George Friedman

Over the past weekend, major global media outlets revealed that the heads of intelligence of about two dozen countries held a (formerly) secret meeting in Singapore and had in fact been held annually for several years. The venue for the talks was the Shangri-La Hotel, also the meeting place for a large, widely known conference called the Shangri-La Dialogue, involving about 600 representatives from around the world. Such conferences, perhaps usually smaller, are common gatherings of government officials and others who want to be and are allowed to be there.

Among the roughly 24 intelligence chiefs at the informal meeting were the heads of U.S. and Chinese intelligence. India’s top intelligence chief was also present, as were chiefs from the Five Eyes network (the U.S., the U.K., Canada, Australia and New Zealand), but no other attendees were identified. It was noted that Russia was not represented – whether by its choice or by the organizers' exclusion is unclear.

According to Reuters, the source of the information was five separate (and I assume unconnected) people. When one person leaks information, it is one of those things. When five leak the same information simultaneously, it is the equivalent of a press release. The existence of these meetings, and the revelation that the U.S. and China were both there and Russia was not, is important. What is fascinating is that there was an organized attempt by someone to blow the cover off the meeting. That the leakers seem not to have identified the others present is interesting, since it suggests the leak came from official sources who respected requests for anonymity – and indicates that those named didn’t mind it being revealed that they had attended secret meetings with major powers for some years.

Equally interesting is that the meeting of two dozen heads of intelligence could have been kept secret. A meeting of such people requires several weeks of logistical planning, security preparations, and exchange of proposed agendas and position papers. Heads of intelligence need to know what they will be dealing with, at least generally. Intelligence chiefs know secrets that their governments don’t want blurted out, and they aren’t casual about this. Their briefings on official positions and authorized threats that might be made require weeks of preparation for the chief and some staff. The American head of intelligence can’t be casually chatting with the Chinese. Obviously, preparations for the Shangri-La Dialogue mostly would have covered the smaller conference. But it is hard to believe that 24 national intelligence heads, plus other officials in each country who had to know of the preparations, could for years fail to leak a conference such as this.

The focus on security might seem less important than the reasons for the leak, but in this case, they are closely linked. The cover of the meeting was blown simultaneously by five sources. The loss of secrecy will raise public concern in at least some countries as to why the meetings were held, why they were kept secret, and what was discussed and agreed to. In democratic countries like the United States, intelligence agencies are already distrusted by many.

If any serious discussions were held, it is hard to believe they took place in the company of all the other nations present. I would guess that the meeting was accompanied by secret bilateral meetings, if not by others then by the Americans and Chinese. Russia's absence from the smaller group is also important. I doubt that Russia was absent from prior meetings, but it was missing from this one. Obviously, China did not insist that Russia be included. The willingness of the Chinese to sit down with other powers without Moscow's presence signifies that Russia is not seen as a great power. It was not missed. China and India had things to talk about concerning conflict on their border. And China and the U.S. had things to talk about as well.

I doubt the discussion was about potential war. I think that is a distant possibility, and any such discussion would be about the substance of war, rules of interception, warning systems and so on. At this fundamental level, the discussion more likely would be about geopolitics – more precisely, Russia. Recall the alliance between Russia and China that went nowhere.

There are two likelier subjects. There have been rumors that the U.S., which has an interest in ending the Ukraine war at or near the front, has asked China to try to work with its putative ally to end the conflict. Discussing China’s ability to do this and the price it would demand for its labor might well be at the level of intelligence directors. Another, even more probable possibility is that the two countries, sensing Russia's decline, want to think of what the future might look like, hoping to prevent conflict between the two remaining superpowers.

After the meeting, it was revealed that India is shifting away from its relationship with Russia, long a major supplier of weapons for India, and toward the United States. Since India has been fighting China along their shared border, this agreement, like other agreements reached in the Pacific, places China in a difficult military position. It is locked out of the Pacific and facing an increasingly powerful India to its southwest.

It is, of course, not clear how long this U.S. relationship with India will last, but for the moment, added to the decline of Russia as an ally and the aggressive actions the U.S. has taken to form alliances in the Western Pacific, China is in a difficult position. I have long argued that China could not risk a war in the Pacific. Now, in my view, China must take steps to deescalate the tension. A meeting involving China’s head of intelligence and his counterparts from the U.S., India, Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand – and not Russia – suggests Beijing understands the position it is in and that it had to shift. The leaders seemed very careful to make the balance of power public.

There has been a spate of speeches and articles in China emphasizing the need to avoid conflict and increase cooperation. Given the geopolitical reality they face, and studying the Russian experience in Ukraine, the Chinese have a new sense of the way the world works, or a confirmation of a reality they saw months ago and hoped would evaporate. It is uncertain if the shift in tone is permanent. The test will be if they stop threatening war over Taiwan or at least confine their threats to ritual gestures. But China is on the whole signaling new relations, and the intelligence meeting and its publication was sobering.

Secret meetings of intelligence heads are dangerous. They can trigger distrust at home, particularly in the United States. But the fact that someone wanted the world to know that the meetings had been going on for a long time and who was involved in them indicates that the leakers came from countries that did well at the gathering. The other 20 or so retained their anonymity. This is a major event in the shifting balance of power.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile
George Friedman: Five Eyes in our Time
« Reply #761 on: August 01, 2023, 09:27:33 AM »


August 1, 2023
View On Website
Open as PDF

    
Five Eyes in Our Time
By: George Friedman

A few years ago, I was invited to a military meeting in Australia. When I walked into the room, I expected to see Australian officers. Instead, the room was awash in American and British uniforms, plus smaller numbers of New Zealanders, and I thought I could make out a couple of Canadians in the distance. It drove home to me that the Five Eyes was not just an agreement on intelligence sharing but a functioning military alliance without the paperwork or, more precisely, with much paperwork that taken together achieved uncertainty. The members of the Five Eyes, for different reasons, did not want to formalize what existed in practice.

The Five Eyes, without the cool name, originated in World War II. Having common enemies, the five nations created a set of alliances to defeat them – and obviously, to share intelligence. Before joining the war, the Americans supported Britain. The Australians also sent forces. In our house, we have a picture of my Australian wife’s cousin, who was shot down on a recon mission flying with the Brits over Germany. After Pearl Harbor and the British defeat in Singapore, the United States became the center of gravity of the Pacific war, with the Australians providing forces and bases in Australia, along with New Zealand. The Canadians had aligned early with Britain. Other nations were involved, but these five had the advantage of having a common language, if not quite a common culture. The American forces grew larger than the British, and many warm discussions were held between British and American commanders. Mistrust still existed, just as it does between and within all services fighting the same war.

War has its foundation in intelligence, in knowing the enemy. The British excelled at human intelligence in Europe and code-breaking. The Americans similarly broke the Japanese code, but they did not have intelligence in Japan or in the island chain they were fighting for. Australia could not provide human intelligence from Japan, but it could provide coast watchers in the Solomons and other islands, reporting on the movement of Japanese warships and Japanese landings. The Five Eyes coordinated operations, from invasions to logistics, but in many ways, the key was the intelligence that they could provide.

The relationship was not formalized. It was simply essential. It remained in place after the beginning of the Cold War based on a simple formula. Any of the five members would share intelligence, if not methods of collection, with the others.

The military side of the Cold War saw intense cooperation between the British and the Americans, with the British holding northern Germany and the Americans the central front. Fearing a potential Soviet nuclear attack, the Americans needed to detect incoming missiles as far away as possible. So, the Distant Early Warning Line was built in northern Canada, and the North American Aerospace Defense Command, based in Colorado, was established, giving the Canadians access to U.S. intelligence and methods for protecting North America. To face off against China, the Australians developed a navy to join the U.S. in the Pacific, where the British were always present. The New Zealanders chose to be prickly, denying U.S. access to their ports unless the U.S. certified that no nuclear weapons were on board its ships. The U.S. refused.

The point I am trying to make is that the Five Eyes was from the beginning, even before the term existed, a military alliance designed to fight in World War II and to collaborate in the Cold War. Each country had other alliances and sometimes shared alliances, but the Five Eyes constitutes a unique relationship of shared interests. At the beginning of the Cold War, the United States became the center of the Five Eyes. But the point is that the alliance members shared the American burden, however ill-advised they may have thought the venture. When the United States invaded Iraq, the British took responsibility for southern Iraq. New Zealand refused combat but did send troops to Afghanistan.

There is an economic dimension to this relationship that is rarely noticed. The Five Eyes nations combined have about 7 percent of the world’s population but over 28 percent of its gross domestic product. There is no common Five Eyes market, but there is a series of bilateral trade agreements intense in joint ventures of various sorts. Obviously, the American economy is the largest, but on a per capita basis all of the countries should be seen as economic successes, domestic grumbling noted.

In practice, the Five Eyes has never been simply an intelligence-sharing agreement. It also entails cooperation as a military-political force. We see this in Ukraine, where Britain and the U.S. are playing roles together, and in the Pacific against China, where the U.S. and Australian navies – including, in time, nuclear submarines – operate, in addition to coordinating economic pressure. The U.S. Congress is in the process of authorizing the implementation of the trilateral AUKUS agreement to, along with the U.K., give Australia nuclear-powered submarines. This would mark a further deepening, operationally and technologically, of the cooperation between three members of the Five Eyes. Additionally, Australia and the U.K. are pushing for more cooperation on other technologies such as hypersonic weapons and quantum computing.

As I said, each country has many allies. But in history, military capability and economic power, the Five Eyes is unique. They have come together out of geopolitical imperatives, but one can’t ignore that the Five Eyes countries are the heirs of English culture. All nations have immigrants and histories of oppressing minorities. Nevertheless, the Five Eyes became a combined global power because, as much as they irritate each other, they also understand each other as only heirs of a tradition could. That creates an international cement that is not present in NATO or in the Chinese-Russian alliance.

I was comfortable at the meeting because I understood the jokes being told. I don’t always get them in Hungary, where I was born. Understanding snide remarks is not a bad foundation for alliances.




Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile
Real Intel Matters
« Reply #765 on: September 05, 2023, 07:28:53 PM »
Have not watched/listened to this yet but it comes very well recommended:

https://mega.nz/folder/0dABgLLR#FmXfgQ-4llV6by0les3XCA

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile
George Friedman: Thinking about Intel Matters
« Reply #769 on: October 14, 2023, 11:25:23 AM »
October 13, 2023
View On Website
Open as PDF

    
Thinking About Intelligence
Thoughts in and around geopolitics.
By: George Friedman

The news from Israel has been stunning, and the explanation that many are providing for what happened is that there was an “intelligence failure.” This reminds me of a Yankees baseball pitcher who had a no-hitter going into the 9th inning. On the second out of the inning, a White Sox player squished a sad little grounder toward third base, forcing the Yankees third baseman to charge and pivot to throw to first. The runner outran the throw. The newspapers ignored the magnificence of a one-hit game and ripped the pitcher for the one lonely hit. The critics could not make it to the lowest rungs of the minor leagues but sat in smug condemnation of a great pitcher.

Pitching in the majors is grueling. But people in the intelligence field have so much more at stake and far less control of the process. They might need to take a satellite image, then comprehend and analyze it to build a picture of reality, all before the enemy takes his next step. A satellite image, like most pieces of intelligence, is not a crisply clean picture but a mystery that has to be decoded while experts debate what it means. Or take human intelligence, where a spy agency might penetrate an office or palace to observe and gather information, all while pretending to be everything they are not and being aware that the enemy is on guard for espionage. A single misstep – usually after a very painful conversation with a man who makes his living making men reveal the truth – could cost them their life.

Failure is, regrettably, built into intelligence. Reacting to some intelligence failure, a reader suggested once that the lapse had been deliberate in order to achieve some end. The lack of understanding of how hard and dangerous intelligence is can cause us to have unreasonable expectations. I have sometimes wondered whether intelligence is not worth the trouble. But intelligence is what we have. It tells us something, and over time it can tell us a great deal. The fear of being discovered can also affect the enemy, who knows that his target’s intelligence will ultimately unscramble some important part of his plan and that he must move at flank speed to strike before being struck. The success of a military operation may well depend on guessing how much time one has. And that may lead to failure.

In analyzing the Hamas attack, the first step is figuring out what you don’t know. The military will task the intelligence organizations and tell them what it needs, which is usually far more than it is going to get. So assume that the question is whether the Iranians were funding Hamas. How would you find out? Accessing transactions is tough. Penetrating the national bank would be nice, but that assumes the Iranians are using the national bank. And when you think about it, finding out who is getting the money is also tough. And at the moment it is not a question of great importance.

Israel is fighting Hamas, which is holding hostages it will likely kill during an assault. Israel’s worry now is to determine precisely where the hostages are and what routine has been set, and to let special operations forces devise and execute an attack plan. The enemy is holding children, and for the moment that outranks money. The Iranians are a hostile force; deciding how bad they are is academic.

For me, a more interesting question is who supplied Hamas with the weapons and other supplies and what route they took to get to Gaza. It is a long journey from Iran, and supplying an attack from there would entail crossing many borders, which would trigger many alerts – or so Hamas would have to assume. But there was no alert, so that means that the supplies were moved slowly to a forward base, with the fighters approaching through misdirection. This is a more important question than money because the answer would mean that several U.S. allies were involved and therefore other threats might materialize. The word “might” is the operant term, except that unless Hamas built up its arsenal in Gaza, Egypt and a line of countries might have been involved, turning the intelligence challenge into something monumental.

The primary issue is understanding not whether Iranian money was used but the politics that permitted Hamas to amass and equip its assault force, whether it occurred in Gaza or elsewhere. How do you hide the movement of many men, carrying arms and moving through some very empty country? That is my question, but I don’t know if it is the right one. And that is the nightmarish problem of intelligence. Finding answers is doable in several ways. More difficult is knowing what question needs answering and putting into operation collectors from the places the weapons may be found.

My own approach to intelligence has developed into forecasting things that will happen and often leaving out the date they will take place. I like to think there is value in having a sense, however imprecise the timing, about the future. But knowing the right questions to ask within hours of an attack, and tasking collectors to find the answers, is a job that does not permit error. And that’s where the intelligence nightmare begins.


Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3250
    • View Profile
China Bans Teslas in “Sensitive” Areas due to Espionage Concerns
« Reply #771 on: October 19, 2023, 03:46:17 PM »
Piece argues it’s safe to assume any Chinese vehicle is indeed spying for China:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCzU5BF-110&t=712s



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19529
    • View Profile
Re: CIA Palestine selfie
« Reply #775 on: November 29, 2023, 06:16:51 AM »
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12803173/CIA-Palestine-Israel-Facebook-flag-selfie.html

We used to complain that they were gutting our intelligence agencies and now we wish they had.

These are the people who should have warned us the attack was coming?

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #776 on: November 29, 2023, 10:17:09 AM »
About twenty years ago someone approached me about working for the CIA, but I was told that I would have to prove my loyalty by doing something against Israel's interest.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19835
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #777 on: November 29, 2023, 10:23:06 AM »
because you are Jewish?

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #778 on: November 29, 2023, 10:32:47 AM »
Exactly so.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19835
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #779 on: November 29, 2023, 10:49:55 AM »
do they ask others similar questions?

like if you are Muslim would you go against your former country or your religion

or if you are gay would you be willing to infiltrate gay criminal orgs?

or if you are Black would you be willing to infiltrate BLM?

what about political party allegiance or memebership?


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19529
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #780 on: November 29, 2023, 11:35:16 AM »
To be fair I suppose they asked people from all those backgrounds if they're willing to do something against israel.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #781 on: November 29, 2023, 01:41:36 PM »
Inquiring minds want to know if they ask Chinese Americans to act against China.

Then there is the matter of the apparent Iranian spies currently working for the Biden Administration , , ,

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile
Clapper
« Reply #782 on: November 30, 2023, 07:06:41 AM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19529
    • View Profile
Re: Were Hunter Laptop Disinfo Signatories on the CIA’s Dime?
« Reply #785 on: December 09, 2023, 11:36:46 AM »
Not that I expect an honest answer….

https://hotair.com/david-strom/2023/12/08/were-former-intel-officials-who-debunked-hunters-laptop-on-the-cia-payroll-n597638

If so, and how will we know, what is the consequence?  Nothing of course.

Didn't Blinken organize it and he was rewarded with the highest cabinet position.  How do you revoke the advise and consent of the Senate on that appointment?  Impeachment I suppose, but of course no Democrat is offended by that behavior.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile



Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Germany awash in Russian Spies?
« Reply #789 on: March 09, 2024, 06:59:40 AM »
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ukraine-says-one-nato-nation-is-awash-with-russian-spies/ar-BB1jzBfm?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=28a2a71fc9034fe9afb8b5e0e1c85961&ei=16


There’s a surprise, what with all the ex-Stasi in need of employment post-reunification, though I guess we should count our lucky stars our Microsoft Network didn’t aggregate it due to some climate change, trans, of Trump is a Russian stooge hook.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #790 on: March 09, 2024, 09:00:20 AM »
In search of the underlying theme here what I come up with everyone is listening in on everyone.  Witness e.g. our leaks of Russian convos at the highest level.

Witness our deliberate leaks in the run up to the Uke War of the level at which we were listening in to the Russians.

Witness Hillary's private server in a bathroom in Colorado.

etc etc


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile
Biden Iran Envoy Iranian spy/dupe?
« Reply #792 on: May 08, 2024, 02:47:28 PM »
FO

(2) BIDEN IRAN ENVOY SUSPENDED FOR MISHANDLING CLASSIFIED DOCS: In a letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Senator James Risch (R-ID) and Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX) said their investigation uncovered that Biden Iran Envoy Robert Malley was suspended last year due to mishandling classified information, and asked Blinken for an official update on any administration investigations of Malley.

According to the letter, Malley transferred classified documents to his personal email, downloaded the classified documents onto his personal phone, and a hostile actor gained access to his phone and the classified information.

Why It Matters: As we reported last year, according to leaked documents, Malley was the head of the Iran Experts Initiative, a spy ring supported by the Iranian government. That spy ring included Ariane Tabatabai, the still-serving chief of staff to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict. The Biden administration has remained tight-lipped on any developments from Justice Department and Defense Department investigations into Malley and the spy ring. – R.C.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3250
    • View Profile
Fox in the Henhouse; jihadi at NSC
« Reply #794 on: May 12, 2024, 11:28:00 AM »
Biden senior director at the National Security Council has jihadist links and indeed posed in Palestinian garb while enrolled at Georgetown.

https://x.com/CarolineGlick/status/1789370455712760109
« Last Edit: May 12, 2024, 03:42:26 PM by Crafty_Dog »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19835
    • View Profile
Re: Intel Matters
« Reply #795 on: May 12, 2024, 01:08:22 PM »
he started out with Obama

the majority of the worst people in the administration came down the roads that lead back to Obama

who has been a recking ball to the US of A

 :x


Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3250
    • View Profile
Open Source Intel Twitter Site
« Reply #796 on: May 15, 2024, 08:57:06 AM »
Great source curating breaking open source intel:

https://twitter.com/Osint613

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile
WSJ: Remember what Assange did
« Reply #798 on: June 26, 2024, 05:27:47 AM »


Julian Assange Is No Hero
A guilty plea might free him, but remember why the U.S. pursued him.
By
The Editorial Board
Follow
June 25, 2024 5:56 pm ET




158


Julian Assange is reportedly on his way to freedom after agreeing to plead guilty to a felony under the Espionage Act. Maybe a sentence of time served is enough, given his five years in British prison and his seven years holed up in the Ecuadorean Embassy. But don’t fall for the idea that Mr. Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, is a persecuted “publisher.”


Former CIA Director Mike Pompeo once described WikiLeaks as “a nonstate hostile intelligence service,” and the label fits. When the U.S. indicted Mr. Assange under the Espionage Act in 2019, Assistant Attorney General John Demers cited the totality of his conduct, soliciting and dumping online classified information that could put the lives of American allies in jeopardy: “No responsible actor—journalist or otherwise—would purposely publish the names of individuals he or she knew to be confidential human sources in war zones.”

A year later, in unveiling a superseding indictment alleging a broader conspiracy on computer intrusion, the Justice Department said Mr. Assange “communicated directly with a leader of the hacking group LulzSec (who by then was cooperating with the FBI), and provided a list of targets for LulzSec to hack.”

Amid the 2016 election, WikiLeaks published embarrassing internal emails from Democratic power brokers. Later investigations said those messages were stolen by hackers tied to Russian military intelligence. Mr. Assange’s outfit also posted the emails without bothering to redact sensitive personal information, including home addresses and Social Security numbers.

WikiLeaks “very likely knew it was assisting a Russian intelligence influence effort,” said a 2020 report by the Senate Intelligence Committee. Its investigation found “significant indications that Julian Assange and WikiLeaks have benefited from Russian government support.” Mr. Assange denied that Russia was the source of the Democratic emails, but it’s hard to see why anyone should believe him.

None of this is the behavior of a journalist or a whistleblower, and Mr. Assange is neither. This would have been obvious during the Cold War, say, if a foreign national had been caught copying and disseminating hundreds of thousands of U.S. military field reports. The internet age makes leaking easier, but it hasn’t blurred these lines anywhere near enough to cover Mr. Assange. If the U.S. had failed to pursue him, it might as well have given up keeping secrets.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72561
    • View Profile
WT: The Dem-CIA alliance
« Reply #799 on: July 09, 2024, 04:10:44 AM »
Democrats’ endless hoaxes

A deep dive into 51 U.S. intelligence officers’ letter calling Hunter’s laptop Russian disinformation

By Rowan Scarborough

We now know the letter of 51 U.S. intelligence officers saying Hunter Biden’s laptop was classic Russian disinformation was the biggest instance of governm=ent interference in a presidential election since — we don’t have to go back too far — the Steele dossier four years earlier.

Funny how both of those deceptions — the Hillary Clinton campaign’s Russia-sourced dossier fed to an obedient FBI, and the laptop letter signed by 51 former intelligence overseers falsely blaming Russia for Hunter’s inbox — were executed by one party: the Democratic Party. The Democrats even got the CIA bureaucracy to dive into domestic politics like some creepy Kremlin gang.

The goal, of course, was to destroy Republican Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential bid.

We know that the FBI and liberal news media relied on British former spy Christopher Steele’s dossier and its list of false felony allegations to sabotage Mr. Trump before and after he reached the White House.

We have learned more about the bogus intelligence bigwigs’ laptop letter designed to suffocate

ILLUSTRATION BY GREG GROESCH

news about Hunter’s scandalous hard drive unearthed by the New York Post. A postelection poll showed that if not for the well-publicized letter, Mr. Trump might have beaten Joe Biden in 2020.

In June, Republicans and a conservative activist group released documents showing how the CIA intervened.

Michael Morell, former President Barack Obama’s deputy and acting CIA director, helped orchestrate the letter of 51. The signatories included Mr. Obama’s two other CIA directors and his director of national intelligence.

We knew that Mr. Biden’s longtime crony and now-secretary of state, Antony Blinken, kick-started the letter from his post as campaign adviser.

The letter said, in somewhat weasel words, that Hunter Biden’s texts and emails were hacked by the Russians (“all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation”). The 51 provided no proof. But they provided then-candidate Biden and his liberal media all the reason they needed to ignore the laptop’s tales of million-dollar deals with shady foreign operatives — with then-Vice President Biden chauffeuring son Hunter on Air Force Two.

Later, Mr. Morell candidly said he helped create the letter for one simple reason: to elect Mr. Biden.

Thanks to Judicial Watch, an aggressive acquirer of government documents via the Freedom of Information Act, we learn that Mr. Morell’s role went deeper. His task was not just to create the letter but to hurry up the CIA to ensure it would be released before an upcoming debate and certainly before Election Day. To do this, he had to exercise his considerable influence at Langley.

He submitted it to the CIA’s Prepublication Classification Review Board five days after the New York Post’s Oct. 14 bombshell, as the voting public was absorbing tales of Mr. Biden’s family’s foreign cash collection.

“This is a rush job, as it needs to get out as soon as possible,” Mr. Morell emailed the board on Oct. 19 at 6:36 a.m.

Mr. Morell was making a raw political request to a board that was supposed to be nonpartisan.

Less than two hours later, an unnamed official told another that the letter contained no classified information. I repeat: two hours.

After another four hours, Mr. Morell received an email giving him the final OK. The letter surfaced in the news that day, just in time for Mr. Biden, whose campaign orchestrated it, to cite the fakery when he debated Mr. Trump.

“The Board determined that it contains no classified information and can be published,” the all-clear said, putting the CIA squarely in Mr. Biden’s camp.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton could hardly believe what he uncovered.

“These documents are astounding. That the CIA would turn around a campaign document like this for Joe Biden’s team in six hours is insane news,” Mr. Fitton said. “This seems to be demonstrable campaign interference by the CIA, and that should be alarming to all Americans.”

On June 25, a joint report by the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees disclosed that “several” letter signers were still on the CIA payroll as contractors. And, it said, Mr. Morell was one of them. And, it said, then-CIA Director Gina Haspel knew the letter was in the works.

The committees headlined their report “The Intelligence Community 51: How CIA Contractors Colluded with The Biden Campaign to Mislead American Voters.”

How misleading was the letter of 51? We know for sure that the laptop hard drive was pure Hunter Biden. The Justice Department team who successfully prosecuted Hunter on gun charges said the FBI determined no Russian hacking.

The letter of 51 is one float in the Democrats’ glittering hoax parade, taking second place only to the Russiansourced dossier filled with unverified anti-Trump rumors and fabrications.

The dossier said there was a “welldeveloped conspiracy of cooperation” between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign. There was not. It said attorney Michael Cohen secretly went to Prague to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aides. He did not. It said Mr. Trump frolicked with prostitutes at the Moscow Ritz. Made up, likely by a Democratic operative, a special counsel report said. The CIA completely rejected the dossier as “internet rumor,” a Department of Justice inspector general report said.

Other Democratic hoaxes: Mr. Trump communicated with the Kremlin through Alfa Bank, but it never happened. A New York Democratic judge and attorney general found Mr. Trump committed fraud on bank loans. In fact, he paid all the loans back,and no bank filed a complaint.

To fend off reports that President Biden is senile, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said supposed videos of him freezing in place and wandering off were “cheap fakes.” This was the White House Hoax of the Year. The videos were not fake, as Mr. Biden’s serial display of senility showed at last month’s 90-minute debate.

We did have one hoax retraction of sorts. For seven years, Mr. Biden and Democrats have alleged that Mr. Trump called Nazis “very fine people.” Conservatives constantly countered that he was referring to the people in Charlottesville, Virginia, who wanted to keep Confederate statues up and those who wanted them removed. Both are very fine people, he said.

Last month, liberal fact-checker Snopes agreed with Mr. Trump, labeling the Democrats’ smear “false.”

Rowan Scarborough is a columnist with The Washington Times