NSA Boss Pretends He Doesn't Know Anything About Wikileaks

from the yeah,-right dept

Here’s a tip to the NSA: if you’re going to lie, at least make those lies sound somewhat believable. The latest is that General Keith Alexander, the director of the NSA, was asked a question about Wikileaks while on TV, leading to the following exchange:

STEPHANOPOULOS: The final point that Pierre made, the question about some government officials are asking whether WikiLeaks is a legitimate journalistic organization or an enemy of the state, where do you come down on that?

ALEXANDER: I have no opinion on WikiLeaks. I really don’t track them. I don’t know — I really don’t know who WikiLeaks are, other than this Assange person.

Of course, this comes out at about the same time as the federal government confirmed that several government agencies are still investigating Wikileaks. To think that the NSA would not be a part of that is somewhat unbelievable, especially given their mandate for foreign surveillance and anything that might lead to terrorism. While I think it’s ridiculous that people think Wikileaks helped terrorists in any way, that has been the position stated by many in the government, so it’s almost certain that the NSA is involved in any such investigation.

Filed Under: , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “NSA Boss Pretends He Doesn't Know Anything About Wikileaks”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Of course

Actually it is probably sad but true. NSA is so disorganized and has such a horrible screening process that they are an easy target for industrial spionage, careless illegal procedures below the upper echelons keeping up appearences and a general lack of communication that will lead to the upper people not knowing about the lower echelons blatant crimes.

I don’t know. The Snowden case is pointing towards a horrible structure of the agency and even worse communication…

Could also be straight up liers in the top, but then the thing will become pretty absurd very fast since it is clear that the committee politicians want more documentation and fabricating that evidence can will be hard if they are double bookkeeping.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Not true, you can become a 4 stars General and be incompetent, it happens a lot in peace times where military personnel don’t need to prove that they are able to coordinate anything, it also happens also when focuses is on politics and not merit which often happens in a lot.

Okay he had no respect for American wartime veterans, but what about his tactical skills as a military leader? In one word, terrible! How could anyone consider General Douglas MacArthur to be a brilliant tactician when he is known for leading the single greatest military defeat in U.S. history, the loss of the Philippines. It is remarkable how MacArthur escaped any reprimand, kept his command and got his fourth star on December 17th and a Congressional Medal of Honor for “gallantry and intrepidity” at Bataan where he spent part of only one day for an inspection. He was awarded the medal after he had already fled and deserted his troops. His ultimate reward was orders to leave the Philippines with his family while his soldiers were subjected to the deadly brutality of the Bataan Death March. The losses were horrific with over 31,000 Americans 80,000 Filipino troops, and 26,000 refugees on Bataan. And let?s not forget about the battle ?retaking of the Philippines? in which 600,000 civilians were killed.




In recent history you got Gen. Tommy Franks who led American forces in the Afghan and Iraq wars.

We like to believe that incompetent people will fail to climb the ladder but that is not true always, specially in a system where who you knows beats what you can do.

Guardian says:

yea ok sure right haha

i don’t either….
so um hes in a embassy hiding in england cause he can come and go anytime right

i bet he dont know aobut that other spy program none of you know of yet snowden is holding onto….
that will break the rage into …..oh my its gonan happen mister president ….the question is whose fraking side are you on the people or that lovely shadow gov’t.

Anonymous Coward says:

Given that the government is busy telling it’s workers to ignore what is already public knowledge on the internet, what can you expect from the boss of NSA?

Again this demonstrates that in order to get to the bottom of this all, it will take public hearings over this as you can’t believe the officials that will willingly lie and then be caught in those lies.

The GOP now has a prime target to reduce the budget over. Given that the NSA has and is building multimillion dollar facilities. None of which can appear to actually tell the truth about earning that money with results. Spying on their own people do not result in terrorists plots. But then again if you are considering blackmail to keep politicians in line…

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

He’s the head of the DAMNED NSA! Of course he’s a liar. It’s part of the job description. The problem is that THAT apparently was the best lie he could with? I mean, you run the agency. You are the prime example for all of your lesser operatives to follow. You are supposed to be better at it than any of the rest of them. Ok maybe our national security really is in trouble.

jlaprise (profile) says:

Completely missing the point people. Wikileaks contains still classified material. Yes I know that sounds silly but its true. People with security clearances such as General Alexander can and do lose their security clearances (it’s a prosecutable crime) for reading classified material above their clearance. General Alexander probably has nothing to worry about…then again…

Anonymous Coward says:

“I have no opinion on WikiLeaks. I really don?t track them. I don?t know ? I really don?t know who WikiLeaks are, other than this Assange person.”

This is possibly completely true. In a job like his it would be important to maintain plausible denyability.
That said:
“I have no opinion on WikiLeaks” – really… if you’ve heard of them you probably have an opinion.
“I really don?t track them” – probably true, he has staff for that
“I really don?t know who WikiLeaks are, other than this Assange person” – possibly true, Assange is the main player so he is aware of him, but no one else would be on HIS radar, again he has staff for that.

Lurker Keith says:

backwards... or?

Ok, so the NSA, in charge of Foreign Surveillance, is spying on its Citizens, but isn’t Spying on foreigners w/ supposedly illegally obtained Classified Documents.

Anyone else think that’s completely backwards?

Or, is this an admission that the NSA isn’t interested in Wikileaks, because they recognize it’s a Journalism organization?

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...