The New York Times just outed the CIA's top Iran spy...

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Great Stuff,
somewhat paranoid,
but substantial all the while.

The good old "peer review'
shuts off your pension when
you do not tow the line.

Chomsky admitted this decades ago.
Can you fathom what the parameters
are like at Cern these days?

As far as the press, they are small
potatoes to the revelations that are
being discovered.

Dumbed Down and Divided,
That is the Law.

originally posted by: rexsblues

In an article published Friday, The New York Times outed the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) top spy overseeing the organization’s efforts in Iran. The paper justified its outing of the undercover CIA spy and his role within the agency by saying it was necessary since the agent is “leading an important new administration initiative against Iran.”

Yes. That really happened.

The Federalist

The MSM is completely out of control, they've pretty much become a quasi-government within themselves, due to their platform, reach, and influence over all individuals, corporations and even country's. These papers and networks subverting the law just need to be completely shut down, let the local news and the independent web based outlets handle the task of informing the people of what they need to know.... which is pretty much the way it already going.

He is not an undercover spy, but the new head of the Iran covert ops unit. Before he was the head of the Counterterrorism Center. That is not by any means a secret.

So what did the evil "quasy-government" MSM do wrong here?

Are you guys even capable of verifying the stuff you read, or do you just choose to believe whatever fits your bias and go with it?

a reply to: rexsblues

I don't know how I feel about this - a known elitist propaganda rag outs a warpig.

Do I G.A.F?

Not really, but it would be good to watch with popcorn and beer.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Quite the coeenkeedink, eh?

It is simple, really, and very underhanded.

How do you fight fire? With FIRE!

Need to make a "fake" media outlet and start posting atrocious stories about the editors and staffers, and reporters for the NYT. Give them a taste of their own medicine.

Accuse them of cheating on their spouses, doing hard drugs, talking to the Russians trying to bribe them, etc.

Why not?

a reply to: rexsblues

Surely this is treason.

a reply to: Cygnis

If loaded with satire and lulz its sounds like a blast, but all we really need is a truly on point hard hitting real journalism front. Theres one well known and loathed spot around here that could have been it, but it just aint. I fear its not possible for such a front to arise without in one way or another getting decimated first; longevity impossible.

So if this spy is killed, will the blood be on the NYT's hands? I would have to say yes.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Wait a minute, are you actually implying that the CIA tends to be out of control thus perpetually requiring being reigned in?!?

Isn't the CIA 'just a group of people'.

Therefore its those people whom need reigning in?

Now what is their primary overall collective goal, which drives them to do things, that require being kept in line?

Ah yes, global war mongering (and the tidings that tend to lead to it).

Now wait a minute, individuals from thsi very organization, aren't they the ones leading this anti-Trump CHAAAAARGE?

Didn't all that start back when he was talking all about CIA policy in the Middle East, etc, was in err and was to be dismantled?

And the core of the DNC platform the past 6 months now, that Trump is a Russian asset and must be impeached and such effort warrants all reason and legitimate procedure being abandoned in such pursuits, hasn't the core fountainhead of all that been none other than the CIA?!?!

Lets not forget the MSM (with NYT being a shining example) being the propagators of said (stop Trump at ALL costs) 'intel'.

Very interesting your position herein... see if NYT gets burnt for this move (which harms Trump's effectiveness) well they're an actual target that could be destroyed. But if we all pat them on the back and blame the CIA where it leaked from, well the actual leak might not be outed while it leaves the MSM (as-is) and the CIA perfectly intact (other than messying up the day of the CIA's Iran dept.).

I mean was this move critical of Iran policy? IS THE NYT CRITICAL OF US IRAN POLICY? If it is, then this might make sense, but if it isn't, and Trump's policy is more or less the same ilk as Obama, then this is clearly political sabotage, and at that point we might get signals of what sorts of lines need to be drawn in all this mess.

Good times in Two Party Town!!!

huge problem but an even bigger problem is the fact that someone from inside the government had to have leaked his identity to the media.

Some tarring and feathering might be in order.

I don't understand the anger at the paper.

I'd be more angry with the Agency.

D'andrea sounds like a scumbag.

A POW interrogator, commanding a private army conducting 'administrative' ops in a country where the CIA are known to have staged coups and subvert order.

From what I can tell from this thread, it wasn't even secret. Only secret from the public who may or may not be supportive of such ops.

I'm wondering if perhaps this little slip was meant to get out, perhaps as a desensitisation piece for the public or maybe a provocation for Iran's benefit.

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: rexsblues

I don't know how I feel about this - a known elitist propaganda rag outs a warpig.

Do I G.A.F?

Not really, but it would be good to watch with popcorn and beer.

Weird dude. A Muslim convert that was the architect of the Signature Strike program (we think you might be acting like a terrorist so we're going to kill you and your family with Hellfire Missile).

Can't say I'm rooting for the guy.

Whatever happened to the good old days of conspiracy theory?
COINTELPRO.
The CIA, NSA, and other alphabet agencies infiltrating the press, the msm, etc. in order to weave their special brand of magic...and more importantly, their viewpoint(s) to keep people arguing just enough...
Did that all just stop?
Or did we forget what our own government has done "for our own good"?

a reply to: xstealth

He was a known figure in Washington. I don't think it's necessarily a case of someone leaking his name so much as just his name being publically said. There's a difference right? lol

a reply to: theantediluvian

Here's the thing.
We the people should have some idea what the CIA is up to. We can't trust the government to tell us, regardless of which party is in the WH.

umm...FREAKING NO.

If the public is aware of what they do, seriously what is the point of the organization then?

Government will always happen. You are not happy with the current one, we've all seen that with your emphasis on trivial matters.

You, being a leading liberal amaze me. You literally just eroded concurrent affairs that should be classified yet get leaked and think it's a good thing.

Do you have any idea how damaging it would be to have moles in our government?

Before you trigger like a lib does on that statement, nothing, NOT A DAMN SLIGHT has been proven regarding Trump/Russia collusion.

originally posted by: Vector99
If the public is aware of what they do, seriously what is the point of the organization then?

You wanna know the sorts of tidings that go on in your ideal scenario???

America's death toll on the world: 27,000,000++

F the CIA.

They need to go.

But as long as they're around, and we expect to have a semblance of Rule of Law, while CIA agents face death when loose lips sink ships, there might ought to be standards of 'decency'.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Spot on for the timeline correction.



That doesn't change anything though IMO, as news reporting has become the most influential Lobbyist in town. Both sides have their hit squads, but the Times has taken it to a whole new level.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Sounds like trolling so then liberal fanatics can scream forever about Trump waging a war on the press. If only Trump could even compete with Obama's war on the press / whistleblowers. He'd have to work tirelessly on it to do so.

Focus, please. The New York Times is known for publishing government disinformation. What makes you think this is not a CIA controlled "leak" to mislead Iranian intelligence? Why is it you assume they lie when they publish some things, but not others?

Its almost like they are deliberately trying to run their own foreign policy in Iran. They dont like Trump taking a hard line so they do this. I dont think its any secret that I hate Trump just as much as the New York Times but the issue hear is not Trump the issue is compromising vital intelligence.

I am curious however if there is any mechanism in America to stop the press running with stories like this? For example in the UK we have the D-Notice system which although voluntary does largely stop this kind of thing happening.

Also I am wondering if this guys name and job was already public record and the New York Times were just reporting on that because if so this makes it a different issue.

Interesting story I will look into it further

EDIT:

So I also found this from 2015

A wide-sweeping story on the CIA’s drone programme and its deep congressional support in Washington has made waves, after the New York Times named top officials linked with the operation – despite requests the agency that it not do so.

At the centre of the story was former counter-terrorism chief Michael D’Andrea. Mr D’Andrea, in addition to overseeing the growth of the drone programme, was also heavily influential in the creation of the agency’s detention and interrogation operations.

Link

Now that is from 2015, so the NY Times actually ousted this guy way before now when he was working under the Obama administration, seems like his name has bee public record for quite some time. Still probably not the best thing to go and make it public knowledge what his new job entails but given that he seems so well known I would be pretty shocked if the Iranians didnt already know who he was.

He has his own wiki seems to have only been up for a few hours but some interesting stuff in it, for example apparently he converted to Islam and was heavily involved in the operation to track down Osama Bin Laden.

There is also this interesting article about the same guy only they use the code name "Roger" from the Washin gton Post

Where they reported that

He also married a Muslim woman he met abroad, prompting his conversion to Islam. Colleagues said he doesn’t shy away from mentioning his religion but is not demonstrably observant. There is no prayer rug in his office, officials said, although he is known to clutch a strand of prayer beads.

Roger was not part of the first wave of CIA operatives deployed after the Sept. 11 attacks, and he never served in any of the agency’s “black sites,” where al-Qaeda prisoners were held and subjected to harsh interrogation techniques.

But in subsequent years, he was given a series of high-profile assignments, including chief of operations for the CTC, chief of station in Cairo, and the top agency post in Baghdad at the height of the Iraq war.

Sounds like a interesting guy but like i say, I dont really think that the Times publishing this is really going to do much harm, if Iran didn't already know who he was then they have much bigger security problems.