4 ms·
Even then, targeting spies is counterproductive. The spy you know about is much less dangerous than spy that you don't know about.
by vetinari 11y ago
Even then, targeting spies is counterproductive.
The spy you know about is much less dangerous than spy that you don't know about.
- sangnoir 11y agoIf they hacked the NSA, I'd suspect most spies are known rather than unknown. There's a curious event where Russia expelled 30 UK diplomats from Moscow - and none of them were intelligence operatives (and this was no coincidence as 1/3rd of the staff were intelligence operatives) - it was just to send a message: "we know who your spies are"[1]. Edit: corrected number of diplomats & added citation 1. http://www.globalresearch.ca/five-reasons-the-mi6-story-is-a-lie/5455740 http://www.globalresearch.ca/five-reasons-the-mi6-story-is-a...
- superuser2 11y agoThis is uninteresting. It is fully expected that foreign countries know about (and extensively surveil) your "official cover" embassy staff intelligence officers. We tailed everyone who stepped out of the Soviet embassy for most of the Cold War. Those people are administrators. Your actual covert operatives will never interact with the embassy in a detectable/obvious way.