3 ms·

Why do I as a private citizen need to know more detailed information about this? What can I possibly do as a private citizen with intelligence about terrorists

Why do I as a private citizen need to know more detailed information about this? What can I possibly do as a private citizen with intelligence about terrorists planning to use laptop bombs on planes? My government has taken the action it deems appropriate to defend the country and its citizens, while still protecting the cover of the agent or asset that gave us the intelligence.

bogomipz 9y ago
>"Why do I as a private citizen need to know more detailed information about this? So you can make an informed opinion. In case you hadn't noticed there a lot of hysteria in the current administration. >"What can I possibly do as a private citizen with intelligence about terrorists planning to use laptop bombs on planes?" You can decide for yourself if you feel like it safe for you or your family to fly. >"My government has taken the action it deems appropriate to defend the country and its citizens, while still protecting the cover of the agent or asset that gave us the intelligence." Except that they didn't. Donald Trump exposed the source of the intelligence: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/world/middleeast/israel-trump-classified-intelligence-russia.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/world/middleeast/israel-t...
- marcoperaza 9y ago
  He disclosed it to the Russian government, which is not necessarily improper. The US and Russian government share classified info all the time; they tried to warn us about the Boston Marathon bomber after all. Some #resist idiot who thinks he's a hero then leaked it all to various news outlets, doing way more damage. It thankfully seems that these agencies heeded the warnings of the US government that publishing the full details would be highly damaging, but I doubt that news agencies are equipped with SCIF-equivalents that would adequately protect the information from other prying eyes.
  - bogomipz 9y ago
    Again you stated: >>""My government has taken the action it deems appropriate to defend the country and its citizens, while still protecting the cover of the agent or asset that gave us the intelligence."" Well then they didn't do that did they? Your own interpretation of what is and isn't "proper" in matters of intelligence notwithstanding, they failed to do what you are stating above. "They" being your government. By the way the "deep state" conspiracy narrative is really tiresome.
    - marcoperaza 9y ago
      >By the way the "deep state" conspiracy narrative is really tiresome. What are you on about?

bogomipz 9y ago

>"Why do I as a private citizen need to know more detailed information about this? So you can make an informed opinion. In case you hadn't noticed there a lot of hysteria in the current administration. >"What can I possibly do as a private citizen with intelligence about terrorists planning to use laptop bombs on planes?" You can decide for yourself if you feel like it safe for you or your family to fly. >"My government has taken the action it deems appropriate to defend the country and its citizens, while still protecting the cover of the agent or asset that gave us the intelligence." Except that they didn't. Donald Trump exposed the source of the intelligence: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/world/middleeast/israel-trump-classified-intelligence-russia.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/world/middleeast/israel-t...

marcoperaza 9y ago
He disclosed it to the Russian government, which is not necessarily improper. The US and Russian government share classified info all the time; they tried to warn us about the Boston Marathon bomber after all. Some #resist idiot who thinks he's a hero then leaked it all to various news outlets, doing way more damage. It thankfully seems that these agencies heeded the warnings of the US government that publishing the full details would be highly damaging, but I doubt that news agencies are equipped with SCIF-equivalents that would adequately protect the information from other prying eyes.
- bogomipz 9y ago
  Again you stated: >>""My government has taken the action it deems appropriate to defend the country and its citizens, while still protecting the cover of the agent or asset that gave us the intelligence."" Well then they didn't do that did they? Your own interpretation of what is and isn't "proper" in matters of intelligence notwithstanding, they failed to do what you are stating above. "They" being your government. By the way the "deep state" conspiracy narrative is really tiresome.
  - marcoperaza 9y ago
    >By the way the "deep state" conspiracy narrative is really tiresome. What are you on about?