NationStates Jolt Archive

No link on this yet I'm afraid, but it's just been on the radio.

Apparently Al-Qaeda sympathisers have been trying to infiltrate MI5 (the counter-intellegence agency of the UK) in an effort to undermine one of the front lines against terrorism. They were caught at the vetting stage of the application process.

It's good to see that security is working.

Linkety link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5142908.stm

As Grand Moff Tarkin once said:

"Fear will keep them in line"

Vetting for most national security agencies is pretty thorough.

They have, aside from your background investigation in the US, the lifestyle polygraph.

It's gotten more sophisticated, and involves frame by frame review of your facial expressions in addition to voice stress and the traditional polygraph equipment. And it involves multiple interviews over time strapped into the equipment.

When they're done, they know everything. The CIA's vetting process is not the same as the standard method of getting a Top Secret clearance. It's far more thorough.

I imagine that MI5 over time has also gotten far more sophisticated, not wanting to relive the horrors that they went through with moles during the Cold War.

The CIA's vetting process is not the same as the standard method of getting a Top Secret clearance. It's far more thorough.

I imagine that MI5 over time has also gotten far more sophisticated, not wanting to relive the horrors that they went through with moles during the Cold War.

Oh the CIA have had their fair share of moles, and they probably still do to this day.

Not so thorough after all.

Oh the CIA have had their fair share of moles, and they probably still do to this day.

Not so thorough after all.

Since the debacles of the 1990s, the surveillance of everyone at the CIA has really become draconian.

It's about as thorough as it can get now. To the point where they have trouble hiring Arabic translators because of the simple fact that they are Muslim.

Since the debacles of the 1990s, the surveillance of everyone at the CIA has really become draconian.

We probably won't know the half of the spy games that go on...moles too embarassing to be revealed, but are denied just enough info to stop doing maximum harm.



It's about as thorough as it can get now. To the point where they have trouble hiring Arabic translators because of the simple fact that they are Muslim.

That's not thorough, that's called hinderance.

"Navy employee Barbara Honegger, who is active in 9/11 conspiracy issues, offers the piggy back theory -- the hijackers found out about the overlapping war games and timed their attack to take advantage of the confusion."

That's not thorough, that's called hinderance.


Yes, it's a stupid hindrance. But I guess they are erring on the side of safety in terms of less potential for moles (in their rationalization).

That, and today, they employ several translators to translate the same document separately, without knowing that another translator is working on it. Then the individual translations are compared to see if someone is fudging the translation.

Oh the CIA have had their fair share of moles, and they probably still do to this day.

Not so thorough after all.


Well if you go by the reporting of the NY Times and consider the sources for the secret info...you must say the CIA still sucks at keeping its own ..and the countries secrets .;)

"Well Achmed, any questions for us?"

"Well...I trust theres no problems with beards....There aren't many women in your office are there?"

Well if you go by the reporting of the NY Times and consider the sources for the secret info...you must say the CIA still sucks at keeping its own ..and the countries secrets .;)

No, most of the posters here on NS call those people "patriots".

Mind you, the NYT isn't even trying to infiltrate al-Q - after all, a relatively uneducated 18 year old slacker from California had no trouble getting a membership in al-Q and a personal meeting with Osama.

No, most of the posters here on NS call those people "patriots".

Didn't take much to find out those secrets did it? Thats more worrying than the 'outting'.

Didn't take much to find out those secrets did it? Thats more worrying than the 'outting'.

No, but I am actually not worried about outing a program that any smart person would assume exists.

I would assume, for instance, that all phone calls and all Internet traffic is monitored, and all monetary transactions tracked.

I would resort to hand carried stuff if I had something important to relay.

No, most of the posters here on NS call those people "patriots".

Mind you, the NYT isn't even trying to infiltrate al-Q - after all, a relatively uneducated 18 year old slacker from California had no trouble getting a membership in al-Q and a personal meeting with Osama.

The problem for the NYT is that A) Al Quaeda has prooven so effective that our intelligence agencies have been unable to infiltrate it. and that B) It's an expensive prospect which is very dangerous to it's most valueble resource: It's reporters.

See, the US government is rational. Even if it does capture your reporter, that reporter is unlikely to even be tried, except in extreme cases. Al Quaeda has an unfortunate habit of removing heads.

The problem for the NYT is that A) Al Quaeda has prooven so effective that our intelligence agencies have been unable to infiltrate it. and that B) It's an expensive prospect which is very dangerous to it's most valueble resource: It's reporters.

See, the US government is rational. Even if it does capture your reporter, that reporter is unlikely to even be tried, except in extreme cases. Al Quaeda has an unfortunate habit of removing heads.

I guess that's why John Walker Lindh didn't get his head cut off, and got a personal moment with Osama. He had no intelligence training (no journalist training) and a high school education.

Infiltrating government agencies is old news. Scientologists managed to infiltrate the IRS back in the 70s! :eek: