4 ms·
It's always hard to believe a second-hand story on the Internet, but suspending skepticism for a moment: kudos to the guy for telling this. There's easily enoug
by sjbase 10y ago
It's always hard to believe a second-hand story on the Internet, but suspending skepticism for a moment: kudos to the guy for telling this. There's easily enough information in there to be identified by the agents he spoke to. He's taking a huge risk.
Or maybe he included some false info for noise injection... if so, how do we know which parts to believe? Skepticism suspension lifted, I suppose.
- secfirstmd 10y ago>He's taking a huge risk I understand how it can be viewed that way and it's certainly a bit of a risk but realistically it's not a huge risk. If this is AVID, at the end of the day, despite what many may think due to outlying examples, they are an intelligence organisation working in a democracy and their agents aren't normally going to be in the business of retribution for someone turning down a pitch. Plus, if they became known for unnecessary retribution for minor things like someone saying no to a pitch, it would damage their long-term efforts in other areas. They will expect that probably the majority of the pitches they make will be rejected. It's not something new to them. Similarly they will have risk assessed and planned for the eventuality of it being made public. Yes, it will annoy them but they will still just keep on moving through the social network analysis diagrams until they find and pitch the right people they are looking for. Plus, while it will make some people more weary in future, occasionally exposure of efforts like this often leads to a softening up of others who might be interested in doing this sort of thing for them in future. Maybe a few months down the line someone in the community gets pissed off with others and remembers this article and drops AVID a mail........