10 ms·
After Multiple Denials, CIA Admits to Snooping on Noam Chomsky
- raganwald 13y agoAfter the second hurdle between me and the article, I gave up.
- obituary_latte 13y agoAnother benefit of blocking scripts by default. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/scriptsafe/oiigbmnaadbkfbmpbfijlflahbdbdgdf https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/scriptsafe/oiigbmn... http://noscript.net/ http://noscript.net/ Shame that they're necessary, but they work well if you can handle the inconvenience of selectively unblocking scripts.
- Ntrails 13y agoIt also means that sights with more than 4-5 things I have to unblock go completely unread as I am unwilling to keep going through them to find the non trash sources.
- obituary_latte 13y agoThere is an "Allow all blocked for session" button on the extension that will usually get the site loaded for you with one click. You can also go to the extension options and white-list the domain(s). You can use wildcards there so you don't have to type all the relevant subdomains (e.g. cdn.example.com would be included with a *.example.com whitelist entry).
- simonebrunozzi 13y agoDid you try: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/script-blocker/edkpojcedjaijmpkagegbjikonnceidm https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/script-blocker/edk... How do you compare them?
- obituary_latte 13y agoI have not tried it, sorry.
- raimue 13y agoIf they make it that complicated to get to their actual content I simply won't read it. I should not be required to block any scripts in order to make a website usable.
- mtgx 13y agoYou can usually copy the link and search for it in Google, and then you can see the post. Or you can use Adblock to manually block the firewall (it sees it as some sort of ad, and removes it as such). https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDAQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthecable.foreignpolicy.com%2Fposts%2F2013%2F08%2F13%2Fafter_multiple_denials_cia_admits_to_snooping_on_noam_chomsky&ei=60EKUqzCBcba4QT-soDoDQ&usg=AFQjCNGrCnH_MM0AUnWEErmLT-wFnMM5yA&sig2=nGUtiJhKuHFQuJF6F-hiLA https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...
- raldi 13y agoYou're not missing much. First it gets mad that the CIA kept a file on Chomsky, then it gets mad that they destroyed this file. And finally, it gets mad that, after the file was destroyed, they couldn't retrieve it anymore.
- RyanMcGreal 13y agoThat was a surprisingly petulant and inaccurate summary of the article.
- raldi 13y agoI'd be interested to see your version.
- RyanMcGreal 13y agoThe CIA has spent years denying that it created a file on Noam Chomsky, but an FOI request has now uncovered an FBI document referencing the CIA file. The CIA file was destroyed at some point, and it is not clear whether that was done in accordance with the Federal Records Act.
- raldi 13y agoWhat's your citation for the claim that the CIA denied ever creating a file? All I see is denials that the file existed at the time of the FOIA requests, and nothing to suggest those denials were untruthful.
- a3n 13y agoAfter the second hurdle, in Firefox, View/Page Style/No Style, then scroll down and the article's there.
- 4ad 13y agoPress ESC after the page loads, but before the ad/banner loads, that will stop the ad from loading and you can read the article.
- openjck 13y agoUse Readability to easily bypass these popups. https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/readability/ https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/readability/
- pohl 13y agoThank you for mentioning that. It gave me the idea of trying Safari's Reader button, which also circumvented the modal div.
- sp332 13y agoSafari even uses Readability's codebase for that feature. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/08/safari_reader_based_on_open_source_project/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/08/safari_reader_based_...
- mcescalante 13y agoEven though there are ways to get around the popups on this article it would still be a lot easier to just post a link to another site without an obtrusive modal window.
- lifeisstillgood 13y ago"CIA fails to understand a damn thing professor talks about"
- jfb 13y ago"CIA wishes he'd just stick to math."
- mumbi 13y agocache for no signup: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fthecable.foreignpolicy.com%2Fposts%2F2013%2F08%2F13%2Fafter_multiple_denials_cia_admits_to_snooping_on_noam_chomsky&oq=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fthecable.foreignpolicy.com%2Fposts%2F2013%2F08%2F13%2Fafter_multiple_denials_cia_admits_to_snooping_on_noam_chomsky&gs_l=hp.3..0l4.326.1387.0.1542.7.7.0.0.0.0.161.656.1j4.5.0....2...1c.1.24.psy-ab..2.5.637.bhdgQ-Z-oZU&pbx=1 http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?output=search&s...
- ceautery 13y agoThe CIA gave up snooping on him because they couldn't understand a damned thing he said... his works are also the reason Watson learned to cry. But seriously, it's no surprise that titling books like "Hegemony or Survival" (I recommend the audiobook, great commute-musing material) and talking about the US being on borrowed time if it keeps acting like 18th century England, will get you examined a little closer by the spooks.
- Amadou 13y agoIt ought to be a surprise. It certainly is contrary to all the rhetoric that I swallowed hook, line and sinker in high school about what kind of country the USA is. I'm willing to bet that Chomsky was not surprised one bit by these revelations.
- npsimons 13y agoHell, according to line I was sold, Chomsky would have fit right in with the founding fathers. That's also assuming you can believe history.
- chimeracoder 13y ago> Chomsky would have fit right in with the founding fathers. By today's standards, many of the founding fathers would be deemed "terrorists" or "enemies of the state [kingdom]". A nation naturally seeks to preserve itself, so perhaps that's not surprising, but it's worth pondering for a moment.
- HarryHirsch 13y agotalking about the US being on borrowed time ... will get you examined a little closer by the spooks. Well, we all knew that, didn't we? But these days, if your friend's friend starts talking like that, your own phone calls and email will be paid attention to.
- dllthomas 13y ago
- northwest 13y ago> For years, FOIA requests to the CIA garnered the same denial: "We did not locate any records responsive to your request." ...because we thought life would be easier for us if we didn't even try.
- icebraining 13y agoJim: What's an official reply? Bernard: Well it just says the Minister has asked me to thank you for your letter and we say something like, the matter is under consideration, or even if we feel so inclined, under active consideration. Jim: What's the difference? Bernard: Well under consideration means we've lost the file, under active consideration means we're trying to find it.
- chrismonsanto 13y agoThat has to be the most invasive modal I've ever seen. Here's the text of the article: ------------------------------------- For years, the Central Intelligence Agency denied it had a secret file on MIT professor and famed dissident Noam Chomsky. But a new government disclosure obtained by The Cable reveals for the first time that the agency did in fact gather records on the anti-war iconoclast during his heyday in the 1970s. The disclosure also reveals that Chomsky's entire CIA file was scrubbed from Langley's archives, raising questions as to when the file was destroyed and under what authority. The breakthrough in the search for Chomsky's CIA file comes in the form of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. For years, FOIA requests to the CIA garnered the same denial: "We did not locate any records responsive to your request." The denials were never entirely credible, given Chomsky's brazen anti-war activism in the 60s and 70s -- and the CIA's well-documented track record of domestic espionage in the Vietnam era. But the CIA kept denying, and many took the agency at its word. Now, a public records request by FOIA attorney Kel McClanahan reveals a memo between the CIA and the FBI that confirms the existence of a CIA file on Chomsky. Dated June 8, 1970, the memo discusses Chomsky's anti-war activities and asks the FBI for more information about an upcoming trip by anti-war activists to North Vietnam. The memo's author, a CIA official, says the trip has the "ENDORSEMENT OF NOAM CHOMSKY" and requests "ANY INFORMATION" about the people associated with the trip. After receiving the document, The Cable sent it to Athan Theoharis, a professor emeritus at Marquette University and an expert on FBI-CIA cooperation and information-gathering. "The June 1970 CIA communication confirms that the CIA created a file on Chomsky," said Theoharis. "That file, at a minimum, contained a copy of their communication to the FBI and the report on Chomsky that the FBI prepared in response to this request." The evidence also substantiates the fact that Chomsky's file was tampered with, says Theoharis. "The CIA's response to the FOIA requests that it has no file on Chomsky confirms that its Chomsky file was destroyed at an unknown time," he said. It's worth noting that the destruction of records is a legally treacherous activity. Under the Federal Records Act of 1950, all federal agencies are required to obtain advance approval from the national Archives for any proposed record disposition plans. The Archives is tasked with preserving records with "historical value." "Clearly, the CIA's file, or files, on Chomsky fall within these provisions," said Theoharis. It's unclear if the agency complied with protocols in the deletion of Chomsky's file. The CIA declined to comment for this story. What does Chomsky think? When The Cable presented him with evidence of his CIA file, the famous linguist responded with his trademark cynicism. "Some day it will be realized that systems of power typically try to extend their power in any way they can think of," he said. When asked if he was more disturbed by intelligence overreach today (given the latest NSA leaks) or intelligence overreach in the 70s, he dismissed the question as an apples-to-oranges comparison. "What was frightening in the ‘60s into early ‘70s was not so much spying as the domestic terror operations, COINTELPRO," he said, referring to the FBI's program to discredit and infiltrate domestic political organizations. "And also the lack of interest when they were exposed." Regardless,, the destruction of Chomsky's CIA file raises an even more disturbing question: Who else's file has evaporated from Langley's archives? What other chapters of CIA history will go untold? "It is important to learn when the CIA decided to destroy the Chomsky file and why they decided that it should be destroyed,'" said Theoharis. "Undeniably, Chomsky's was not the sole CIA file destroyed. How many other files were destroyed?"
- mumbi 13y agoChomsky is one of the most important persons in this day in age when it comes to political thought. He's the only one that seems to think.
- pejoculant 13y agoHere is a link to the actual CIA document that was released: http://www.scribd.com/doc/159950486/CIA-FBI-Referred-Doc http://www.scribd.com/doc/159950486/CIA-FBI-Referred-Doc
- marcuspovey 13y agoIf you have firebug installed, setting display:none on the modal divs works a treat.
- robomartin 13y agoI think everyone interested in American politics needs to read some of Chomsky's work. I don't agree with everything he says. It is important to hear and consider all sides of every argument. In general terms, yes, I believe we've made a mess out of foreign relations for a long time. Not sure I'd go as far as calling us terrorists. I can absolutely see how big brother would want to keep him and other under watch. EDII: My problem with such figures is that universities put them up on pedestals and don't necessarily go out of their way to present contrasting viewpoints on the same stage, at the same time and to the same audience. The young and the impressionable swallow this stuff up without much thought and observation because they are led to idolize such figures. This results in intransigence and extreme positions without thought later in life. In other words, they are handing people fish rather than teaching them to fish.
- arcosdev 13y agoI agree with you to some extent, however I think that in many arguments/debates one side can be so clueless and uniformed as to be unworthy of reasoned discussion. This has sadly become the almost default state for many right-wing commentators as they strive for "authenticity" and the analytical, intelligent conservative is left by the wayside.
- andy_ppp 13y agoI don't see how America isn't a terrorist state at this point - they are murdering people in cold blood in Pakistan without trial because Obama/NSA/CIA/etc. say it's a good thing. This is the definition of a terrorist in my book - thinking you operate outside the law and taking actions into your own hands like some mad vigilante, as opposed to working with the Pakistani government to resolve issues you have by handing over evidence.
- rayiner 13y agoThere is no Pakistani government control over those regions. Osama was hiding under their nose for how long?
- 13y ago
- spankalee 13y agoAfter killing that annoying overlay in the web inspector, I got to read a terrible, shallow article. As a layman reader, the assumptions made by the author and Athan Theoharis seem pretty big, unless they have something else to back it up. The arguments seem to go like this: 1. CIA denies having a file on Chomsky 2. Someone find a memo that _mentions_ Chomsky 3. Assumption 1: Therefore the CIA had a file on him 4. Assumption 2: Since the CIA had a file at some point, the denial is a lie, but we'll also take it as truth and conclude that they destroyed the file 5. Assumption 3: Destroying CIA files clearly falls under the Federal Records Act. I mean, at least give me a little more reason to believe those conclusions. Historically or by policy does it really follow that mentioning Chomsky means he has a file? I find it hard to believe that, like Wikipedia, just mentioning someone (in the 70's at least) creates their file. Have CIA files already been determined to have "historical value", is there a case? Otherwise I just have to trust this guys opinion.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- coldtea 13y agoYour breakdown is not what the article says. They didn't find some random memo that merely mentioned Chomsky. They found a memo from CIA to the FBI, requesting to provide more information on people and actions related to an event, with the justification that the event was "endorsed by Chomsky" (as if he was someone dangerous whom you should watch carefully the groups and events he endorses). I'd rather trust the "expert on CIA/FBI" that a random comment that mis-represents the article so badly. (Well, beside the obvious that of course they had a file on Chomsky, that's what they do, and people like Chomsky is who they target. If not the CIA, the FBI sure did, and CIA had them do work for them and took peeks. Heck, they had huge files on people like John Lennon and MLK).
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- Tloewald 13y agoAs a lay reader who has worked in Government, this isn't about assumptions, it's about how bureaucracies work. Theoharis is interviewed because he is a lifelong expert on FBI-CIA cooperation. Presumably this is worth something. His argument is that if a letter goes from CIA to FBI or vice versa regarding "NOAM CHOMSKY" then this means that at minimum there is a file labelled "NOAM CHOMSKY" containing this memo at both the CIA and the FBI. Therefore when the CIA said nothing was found under FOIA requests for a file on Noam Chomsky either (a) this was a lie or (b) the file was illegally destroyed. Based on my own experience working in government offices, this is a pretty sound argument. If a letter is sent from X to Y about Z, then there has to be a file on Z to put the letter into (both at the sender's and receiver's ends). If the file doesn't exist, it will be created just to hold that letter.
- zenocon 13y agoset TB_overlay and TB_window to display: none
- angrydev 13y agoI highly recommend the readability plugin (http://www.readability.com/addons http://www.readability.com/addons) for dealing with these terrible overlays.
- borplk 13y agoWow just wow. Why do you even submit an article from a site like that? They clearly don't want people to read it.
- gigonaut 13y ago$('#TB_window, #TB_overlay').hide()
- nadaviv 13y agoYou can run this to get rid of the annoying overlay: $('#TB_window,#TB_overlay').remove()
- everettForth 13y agoJust hit "escape" when the page loads. This is "hacker news", right?
- jgalt212 13y agoIf I were the CIA, I'd snoop on Noam Chomsky. The guy has never had a pleasant word ever to say about the US Govt. And if he were more of a man of action, than man of letters, I'd suspect him of actual subversive acts.