Long Live PRISM!
Published in Vzgliad Daily
(Russia) on 7 August 2013
by Aleksey Filatov (link to original)
Our partners across the Atlantic moped and sulked over Edward Snowden's revelations about PRISM, a wire-tapping program designed by American intelligence agencies, and took action to improve the program's reputation — first and foremost, in the eyes of its own citizens.
The New York Times reported on Monday, Aug. 5 that intercepted phone conversations between Ayman al-Zawahiri, the leader of al-Qaida, and Nasser al-Wahishi, the leader of the Yemeni branch of that organization, spurred the closure of U.S. embassies in the Middle East and Africa.
According to that publication, the two discussed concrete plans to launch an attack that could have been the most significant one since 9/11. The New York Times noted that while the terrorist attack was supposed to be launched on Aug. 4, U.S. officials were unable to determine the attack's exact target.
CIA officials pointed out that it is extremely rare for leaders of al-Qaida's main franchise in Pakistan to discuss serious plans of attack with other branches of the organization, which makes the interception of these conversations — which was facilitated by the PRISM system — stand out.
So that's the story.
U.S. officials managed to identify the evildoers, forestall a terrorist attack of 9/11 proportions and intercept plans that are only discussed once in a blue moon. And what an accomplishment this would be — if only it were not obviously a hoax.
First of all, if an intelligence agency did intercept information about such an attack, it would never reveal the identities of the people involved in the negotiations. That's the first red flag.
Second, it's quite difficult to evaluate the potential scale of a terrorist attack based on indirect information. So the fact that the expected terrorist attack was being compared to the events of 9/11 raises another red flag. It shows that the hoax was designed to show Americans the scale of the possible tragedy that could have befallen them had the intelligence agencies not protected them.
Third, the inability of U.S. intelligence to reveal the exact location of the attack serves as a third sign that this is a hoax.
Finally, the reports stress the low rate of success in monitoring discussions of serious terror attacks by leaders of al-Qaida. The idea that these plans were being discussed at all is extremely unlikely.
So: Long Live PRISM!
And let's not raise our eyebrows at the do-gooders in the American government. After all, with this information, they saved not only American citizens, but also their NATO cohorts in Great Britain, Germany, France, the temporarily off-limits Middle East and North Africa.
Lots of American citizens continue to fall for this, sincerely believing that the all-encompassing PRISM program is the key to their salvation.
The New York Times reported on Monday, Aug. 5 that intercepted phone conversations between Ayman al-Zawahiri, the leader of al-Qaida, and Nasser al-Wahishi, the leader of the Yemeni branch of that organization, spurred the closure of U.S. embassies in the Middle East and Africa.
According to that publication, the two discussed concrete plans to launch an attack that could have been the most significant one since 9/11. The New York Times noted that while the terrorist attack was supposed to be launched on Aug. 4, U.S. officials were unable to determine the attack's exact target.
CIA officials pointed out that it is extremely rare for leaders of al-Qaida's main franchise in Pakistan to discuss serious plans of attack with other branches of the organization, which makes the interception of these conversations — which was facilitated by the PRISM system — stand out.
So that's the story.
U.S. officials managed to identify the evildoers, forestall a terrorist attack of 9/11 proportions and intercept plans that are only discussed once in a blue moon. And what an accomplishment this would be — if only it were not obviously a hoax.
First of all, if an intelligence agency did intercept information about such an attack, it would never reveal the identities of the people involved in the negotiations. That's the first red flag.
Second, it's quite difficult to evaluate the potential scale of a terrorist attack based on indirect information. So the fact that the expected terrorist attack was being compared to the events of 9/11 raises another red flag. It shows that the hoax was designed to show Americans the scale of the possible tragedy that could have befallen them had the intelligence agencies not protected them.
Third, the inability of U.S. intelligence to reveal the exact location of the attack serves as a third sign that this is a hoax.
Finally, the reports stress the low rate of success in monitoring discussions of serious terror attacks by leaders of al-Qaida. The idea that these plans were being discussed at all is extremely unlikely.
So: Long Live PRISM!
And let's not raise our eyebrows at the do-gooders in the American government. After all, with this information, they saved not only American citizens, but also their NATO cohorts in Great Britain, Germany, France, the temporarily off-limits Middle East and North Africa.
Lots of American citizens continue to fall for this, sincerely believing that the all-encompassing PRISM program is the key to their salvation.