Intelligence agency staff leave their roles, just like anyone else does. Unregulated? They're as regulated as the rest of us. Then you have the article casting aspersions on them for doing so, it must be about money and malign foreign influences. Of course foreign states use proxies; so does the UK. Why's that even mentioned as if it's implying ex-intel staff are the proxies - which as far as I'm aware, they're not?
Should we ban these people from working again, or ensure they only flip burgers for the rest of their lives for daring to leave the public sector?
> Private intelligence firms claim that illegally obtained information is routinely submitted to courts in the U.K., with the third industry figure telling POLITICO there are “ludicrous cover stories put in front of judges” where people are trying to “launder stolen information into court proceedings.”
This sounds like "parallel construction" with fewer steps.
I'm not sure this issue is specific to intelligence, as many government employees retire from their posts and respawn as contractors and consultants. how is it different from some retired mandarins greasing institutional and enterprise sales?
> “We don’t do things like that here at all. So, Vauxhall [MI6] will almost never outsource meaningful intelligence work to the private sector,” they said.
That one explains that "Vauxhall" is a metonym for MI6, whose headquarters is in Vauxhall.
> Still, trading in knowledge is commonplace. The same person added that there is a “lot of frustration from both sides of the river [Thames] that the old boys’ network was getting a bit too informal, with people telling their clients that they can call their old buddies.”
That one completely fails to explain that "both sides of the river" means MI6 and MI5 (whose headquarters are on different sides of the Thames).
11 comments
[ 5.2 ms ] story [ 31.5 ms ] thread(Just finished a Chuck rewatch)
Isn't that just stalking? Why didn't they just call the cops?
Intelligence agency staff leave their roles, just like anyone else does. Unregulated? They're as regulated as the rest of us. Then you have the article casting aspersions on them for doing so, it must be about money and malign foreign influences. Of course foreign states use proxies; so does the UK. Why's that even mentioned as if it's implying ex-intel staff are the proxies - which as far as I'm aware, they're not?
Should we ban these people from working again, or ensure they only flip burgers for the rest of their lives for daring to leave the public sector?
This sounds like "parallel construction" with fewer steps.
> “We don’t do things like that here at all. So, Vauxhall [MI6] will almost never outsource meaningful intelligence work to the private sector,” they said.
That one explains that "Vauxhall" is a metonym for MI6, whose headquarters is in Vauxhall.
> Still, trading in knowledge is commonplace. The same person added that there is a “lot of frustration from both sides of the river [Thames] that the old boys’ network was getting a bit too informal, with people telling their clients that they can call their old buddies.”
That one completely fails to explain that "both sides of the river" means MI6 and MI5 (whose headquarters are on different sides of the Thames).
Get paid 300-2000$+ each for 1 hr calls? I'd be shocked if expert networks weren't being used for subterfuge.