3 ms·

Firstly, it's a bit ridiculous that such lengths are taken to "anonymize" the country's name. Turns out it's not that hard to speculate, especially given the JT

by borski 16y ago

Firstly, it's a bit ridiculous that such lengths are taken to "anonymize" the country's name. Turns out it's not that hard to speculate, especially given the JTA article posted above. What I'm really curious about is whether Country X approached the US with this information in an attempt to gain good "karma," or if the US approached Country X with an active investigation and they responded in a manner of "Oh, yeah...meant to tell you about that! Sorry!"

sethg 16y ago
...or someone in Country X’s embassy decided that this guy was more likely to be a nut or an agent provocateur than someone in a position to offer really useful intelligence, and therefore there was no downside to turning the fellow in to the FBI. He should have gone to the Russians. I hear their spying-on-America department is a little understaffed these days.