Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LLLefty who wrote (20767)	3/6/2002 6:36:16 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

I don't buy the "dismissal" by the FBI/CIA. Now I know I'm draping myself with my "cloak of conspiracy", but I did mention that having the DEA being the source of the information seemed unusual. But here are several other scenarios for consideration. It could be as the Post article claims, or it could part of a broader message being sent to the Israel's, with the Post article providing the "plausible deniability" to let the Israelis off the hook, since the other 3 letter agencies could claim it was the work of some rogue DEA agent, working out of his "specialty". But the DEA, with their ability to track money laundering activities through liaison with Customs and FINCEN, might have identified the ring as a by-product of some other investigation. They routinely track activities of suspicious individuals transiting our borders, and one can only suspect that some form of illicit activity might be involved in financing the espionage ring. It could be the product of some DEA stupid enough to try and pull an "end-run" around his superiors. But I certainly wouldn't pull such a stunt unless I was sure I could back it up with more than supposition. Afterall, my job would be on the line were I to do so. If I have the documentation, then I have some measure of protection under the "whistle-blower" act. Thus, if this guy is fired, then the evidence would tend more to the "rogue agent" analysis. If he isn't fired, or severely reprimanded, then the FBI and CIA have something to hide and are giving him a "pass" to prevent the truth from coming out.. That's how I see it. Hawk

To: LLLefty who wrote (20767)	3/8/2002 6:53:25 PM
From: Elmer Flugum	Respond to of 281500

Keep in mind, Israel left Jonathan Pollard on the outside of a very locked door to the Israeli Embassy as the Americans were closing in. They left him out in the cold, literally and figuratively. Israeli officials initially denied knowing about Pollard, but it all came out in time. The Americans probably needed to guarantee more loans for the only democracy in the Middle East before they finally came clean. BTW, what happened to the Daniel Pearl story and some facts that seem to have been skipped over...like he was an Israeli citizen and his Mother was not Jewish and he may not have been either.