Ironic, isn’t it?
This article about the inadequacy of the NSA’s security check of Edward Snowden is behind a WSJ firewall, but here’s a discussion of what it said:
A federal review revealed that the U.S. government bungled NSA leaker Edward Snowden’s most recent background check…
Investigators missed key information in Snowden’s last background check, including a security violation and his employment with the Central Intelligence Agency. Furthermore, background checkers did not collect significant information from anyone other than Snowden’s mother and girlfriend.
It’s not that there was any huge red flag that was missed. But the check was cursory and incomplete on the face of it.
And these are the people tasked with gathering intelligence vital to our national security?
The NSA is a bureaucracy.
The people that conduct background investigations are not the same people collecting intelligence. I used to work as a contractor for Army Intelligence and Security Command in Berlin and the background investigations were conducted by the Defense Investigative Service. DIS has screwed up before. Remember the Walker spy ring?
The fish has had 5 long years to rot from the head down.
Good luck Snowden got through.
Remember, he is telling on these malicious fools. Thank goodness they are as incompetent as they are corrupt and vile for spying on the rest of us.
When I was worked on a contract for the Department of Health and Human Services that did medical expenditure surveys, I had to have a security clearance even though in my position I didn’t have access to or work directly with survey data. Everyone I ever knew was interviewed, and at length.
I see in that excerpt of the WSJ article at the Free Beacon site that the background check was done by a private contractor. Highlights once again the problem of inadequate supervision of contractors.
Yes, a Top Secret clearance ain’t what it used to be. Or at least that’s the way it appears. Like Ann, when I was investigated for a Top Secret clearance, they talked to everyone I had ever known or worked for. It was a very thorough thing. Not now. It appears that if you can prove you voted democrat, you pass. 🙂
Geoffrey: I hold a candle to no one in my contempt for this administration, but our long national descent did not begin with President Peace-Keeper. Our country was teetering on a cliff and all he had to do was push.
Si se puede. We Were The Ones We Were Waiting On after all.
Speaking of hacking: I can’t remember where I picked up this old trick (Ace?) but one can usually access all WSJ articles by copying then pasting the text of the WSJ headline into a Google search (it worked for me on this one about Snowden). Apparently there is some kind of agreement between Google and the WSJ that permits this.
This may be really old news, but in view of the “geezer factor” I thought I’d mention it.
KLSmith,
However true that may be, there’s little doubt that this administration has taken intelligence gathering, etc. to previously unattainable lows.
it’s not merely a matter of incompetence, it entails obstructing and hindering those remaining that are actually competent.
The CIA seems to be better at keeping their agents, even the desk ones, undercover than we may have expected.
Their incompetence explains the need to collect a gazillion bits of information about everyone. Where finesse, hard work, and skill were once required for intelligence gathering, brute force and ignorance have replaced them.
While the computers do the work filtering out data, the NSA clowns can surf the web, watch porn, and goof off all day.
Sounds like the same kind of vetting given Huma Weiner…
Wm Lawrence: Bet you they knew exactly what they were getting (and wanting) with Huma.