Durova denies everything, She's not a federal agent, she just plays one on Wikipedia Options

Well, yes. Durova doesn't work for the FBI, she says. Well, maybe her picture of Mata Hari is a good metaphor.

Mata Hari was such an INCOMPETENT COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AGENT that she was caught, and
shot by firing squad.

MATA HARI: Drama. Self-aggrandizement. Life rending messup. Blood on the wall.

Whereas I did not presume Durova to be a spy....

...MH sounds an awful lot like Durova, after all....
(IMG:http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm3/jimboswish/DefnotDurova.jpg)

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey:

But suddenly, as the highest levels of some-certain-agency have her name brought to their attention...

I don't get what you mean by this? If she works for them, they would already know all about what she's doing, anyway.


Do you mean because someone on WR has accused her of working for the FBI or something, they will be angry at her?

?

This is all a joke, right? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)

Someone on WR has outed her, if she is indeed in intelligence. They will be angry with her for her incompetence in being outed and being so high profile. Is that it?

People working in intelligence will sometimes get accused of being spies or intelligence agents. They will have their own way of dealing with it, which they've probably been taught. Perhaps it would be to simply deny it- no-one can prove it, and then they discredit the source of the accusation. Problem solved.

What I mean is, she wouldn't have to 'hide' on a blog- as if the FBI or whoever couldn't find her there lol. At the most they would tell her off and give her advice on how to manage the situation in future. But if they're her employers she can hardly hide from them (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)


I still think her being an intelligent agent is not very likely. I don't think she would have made such a thing on her userpage and in her name of being in the military. She would have chosen a sweet and un-spylike identity, like "Merkinsmum" for instance (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif) who is named after her cat.

Someone on WR has outed her, if she is indeed in intelligence. They will be angry with her for her incompetence in being outed and being so high profile. Is that it?

Yes, I got a "tip" that she's in the FBI. It could be wrong, i.e she could be in DIA (Defense Intel Agency, for example) but I rather doubt it. FBI hired massively in 2004, the year she quit her Naval stint. They were showered with millions for terrorism and cybercrime, that year. Being hired that year wasn't anything exceptional at all. And I doubt she's a spy. More likely a "research wonk" with penchant for bad research. So she's a natural for that place. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)

As for "getting in trouble", the issue at hand is the "level" to which this report (which mentions her as a person of interest) went last week, and the full report, is going, next week puts the concept of "trouble" on a whole new level. Per the timing, per info I share more extensively with a few people on this board, there was a report that went out on April 14th. So her stated "intent to rest" the next day, April 15th, was interesting, to say the least. At least from my point of view.

I thought at first that someone told her to "stop posting on Wikipedia", but since she didn't stick to the "resting" thing, it looks like it was not official, and as predictable with any crackboard-wiki-freak, she couldn't stick to it.

Of course, she may wind up having nothing to do with any intel agency, and being a checkout girl at Walmart with an overweaning ego. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) Nonetheless, she's on the report, due to the "tip", a few other factors.

I still think her being an intelligent agent is not very likely. I don't think she would have made such a thing on her userpage and in her name of being in the military. She would have chosen a sweet and un-spylike identity, like "Merkinsmum" for instance (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif) who is named after her cat.

That would imply "intelligence" no pun intended. That would be what *you* would do, and yes, that would be smart, but why presume that on someone else. She's quite a showoff.

What I mean is, she wouldn't have to 'hide' on a blog- as if the FBI or whoever couldn't find her there lol. At the most they would tell her off and give her advice on how to manage the situation in future.

Uh. It had to do with a report coming out. And something being sent the same day. And yeah, she'd named in it as a potential involved person.

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey:

Given Durova's penchant for 'sleuthing' on WP, it's not implausible that she's a stringer for the FBI, retained to help find potential baddies who maintain a shifting presence on WP.

But that's utter speculation, unsupported by any credible evidence.

But that's utter speculation, unsupported by any credible evidence.

Such that you are aware of.

But that's utter speculation, unsupported by any credible evidence.

Such that you are aware of.

Correct. The rules of the game of epistemology is that a notion is unproven until it's proven.

But that's utter speculation, unsupported by any credible evidence.

Such that you are aware of.

Correct. The rules of the game of epistemology is that a notion is unproven until it's proven.

...(proven to) YOU, apparently.
........Because if you haven't seen the evidence, no one has seen the evidence....

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey:

Of coure. If you want me to believe a thesis, you have to exhibit the evidence and analysis to me.

I have no difficulty accepting that you believe the thesis (albeit for reasons unbeknownst to me).

Fair enough.

Given Durova's penchant for 'sleuthing' on WP, it's not implausible that she's a stringer for the FBI, retained to help find potential baddies who maintain a shifting presence on WP.

She wouldn't then boast about her sleuthing powers, but would keep relatively quiet about them, you would think.

She wouldn't then boast about her sleuthing powers, but would keep relatively quiet about them, you would think.

You would. I would. She, not so much. She's got her own way. She likes to post her entire life online. See her blog. Her whole grandma's story, etc.

I think she might be an FBI (or DIA) back office worker, researcher, or someone who works with organizing events, who fancies herself Mata Hari, in a very real way, because of the larger institutional personality. If she had a real role there, she *would* be more careful. But she's no hope of that. So she's on Wikipedia 24/7, making a "big shoo" out of everything. And throwing her weight around far more than warranted. She does that all the time, in any context.

Remember. This is the "queen" of journalist-ambulance-chasing and last-minute-libel-bandwagon-ladies.

• Who frantically called the press as she could, to get her name in the paper.
• Who put the entire Congressional IP roster on her watchlist. And bragged about it.
• And wrote articles with a Congressional Press officer's name in it without reading the content carefully or even calling him first.
• Then being completely unapologetic afterwards, as if it was her right to do all the above.
• The guy's name is still on the "Congressional Scandal" list, after he left his job. And he did nothing at all. It's complete disgusting yellow journalistic grade school bullshit.
• ... I could go on....

She thinks all these things are fine, and they are her right.

I don't know about you, but that's not anything I can relate to.

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey:

Remember. This is the "queen" of journalist-ambulance-chasing and last-minute-libel-bandwagon-ladies.

• Who put the entire Congressional IP roster on her watchlist. And bragged about it.
• And wrote articles with a man's name in it without reading the content carefully or even calling him first.
• Then being completely unapologetic afterwards, as if it was her right to do all the above, and more...
• ... I could go on....

She thinks all these things are fine, and they are her right.

I don't know about you, but that's not anything I can relate to.

If she really has been taken on by some security forces, they perhaps haven't chosen the best person for the job, then (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

If she really has been taken on by some security forces, they perhaps haven't chosen the best person for the job, then (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

Jesus. Don't get me started.

She wouldn'tve been intel's first hiring mistake. But being female, she'd normally be stuck in a room with a knee-high glass gender-ceiling anyways. The FBI is uber-sexist. Women aren't taken seriously by the FBI. Hence her limited damage potential. Not to congratulate them, but in her case, it would be a blessing.

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey:

Somehow I have trouble thinking of Durova as Wikipedia's Miss Congeniality.

This post has been edited by Moulton:

Somehow I have trouble thinking of Durova as Wikipedia's Miss Congeniality.

Yeah, I don't think that's the norm over there. Fantasy.

Though the "Miss Congeniality pun" is definitely cogent.

I could make a joke about her being Jodie Foster in Silence of the Lambs.

But she reminds me more of Hannibal Lecter than Jodie.

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey:

The FBI and several other agencies are often in need of people who speak more than one language to work as intel analysts. After a few years of working in such a position, an analyst can, presumably, advance into management, probably supervising a team of analysts. These intel analysts for the FBI are usually not special agents. Special agent is a specific designation for FBI employees who have completed the FBI's special agent program at Quantico.

The hiring process for FBI special agents is very selective. I know because I looked into it when I left the military, but didn't go through with it because I found a job with a higher starting salary. There are age and other restrictions to become a special agent. Special agent programs for other agencies, like the Secret Service, are just as selective. The selection process to be an intel analyst, or similar position, isn't as severe. The requirements are usually just to be a US citizen, know at least one other language, have some college education, preferably a bachelor's degree, and be able to obtain a security clearance (i.e. don't have a criminal record or a large amount of debt). It helps if you are ex-military. It's ok for intel analysts to say that they hold this type of position, but they can't talk specifics about what they do.

This post has been edited by Cla68:

DL, Durova told me point blank that she has nothing to do with the FBI or any intelligence agency. I suppose that's not evidence, just testimony, but it seemed credible as far as it goes. If there's evidence that she's lying, and in fact works for the FBI or the like, I should like to know about it, as, I'm sure, would we all.

What we need here, I think, is some evidence. If it's true, this is news.

For those who may have missed it, she denies it categorically in this blog post.

I believe that she's telling the truth. The employee names of almost all federal agencies are public information by law. Even if she wasn't, what's the big deal with working for the FBI?

Maybe we can ask Durova to conduct an FBI-style investigation to discover how Disillusioned Lackey came into such doubtful evidence that Durova is retained by the FBI to conduct FBI-style investigations.

Maybe we can ask Durova to conduct an FBI-style investigation to discover how Disillusioned Lackey came into such doubtful evidence that Durova is retained by the FBI to conduct FBI-style investigations.

You know, you are really a drip sometimes, Moulton.

It's not a debate.

Of course not.

It's a comic opera.

It did intrigue me when I first saw her userpage, that it goes on at length about her being in the navy, but I don't think it went into what she'd been doing since leaving. I'd just assumed she must've had a breakdown or something to be honest and not been working, or that it's just not as interesting, but maybe DL's theory provides an explanation for this silence.

This post has been edited by wikiwhistle:

It did intrigue me when I first saw her userpage, that it goes on at length about her being in the navy, but I don't think it went into what she'd been doing since leaving. I'd just assumed she must've had a breakdown or something to be honest and not been working, or that it's just not as interesting, but maybe DL's theory provides an explanation for this silence.

All I know is, besides getting an "infotip" which may or may not be true, or accurate (ie she might work for another agency of similar investigative capacity)....

..... Jimbo defends her hard and fast, and in contexts unusual to the average loudmouth administrator.

.... Jimbo only defends two things: Those who have power/money, or those affiliated with power/money.

No other reason for his intervention. None. (oops, sorry, I forgot sexual favors - but that was de facto ruled out) Jimbo never does the right thing, for the right thing's sake. Ergo Wikipedia Review. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/mellow.gif)

She's recent ex--mil. Govt family. Allegations of FBI. Not likely a corporate gal. You do the math.
He defended her far too much and too well, far too early in her admin career and in the face of large and loud protest, for there not to be some institution behind her.

That's why I take the allegation seriously.

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey:

I was more skeptical than most of DL's claims that Durova was FBI. But I will say one thing: Durova is full of shit about most everything she's ever claimed about the Navy.

She can't be Mata Hari though: IIRC, MH got by using feminine wiles and sex appeal. Durova has neither.

If there's any truth to it at all, DL, I would expect there to be two or three layers of subcontracting to distance someone like her from any governmental agency, like Homeboy Insecurity or the FBI. Government agencies have generic contracts with low-profile private investigative or research firms which then have sub-contractors who hire otherwise flaky and unreliable informants or stringers.

This post has been edited by Moulton:

I was more skeptical than most of DL's claims that Durova was FBI. But I will say one thing: Durova is full of shit about most everything she's ever claimed about the Navy.

She can't be Mata Hari though: IIRC, MH got by using feminine wiles and sex appeal. Durova has neither.

Lol true (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

If there's any truth to it at all, DL, I would expect there to be two or three layers of subcontracting to distance someone like her from any governmental agency, like Homeboy Insecurity or the FBI. Government agencies have generic contracts with low-profile private investigative or research firms which then have sub-contractors who hire otherwise flaky and unreliable informants or stringers.

OH. You ARE out of the loop, aren't you Moulton.

The FBI now devotes nearly two-thirds of its resources —some $4 billion —to waging war on terrorism. The approach today is not the traditional police work of investigating actual crimes but the far more slippery goal of preventing terrorist attacks before they occur. (Feb 25, 2008)

(note: that's 4 billion to investigate "domestic terrorism", as in people in Poohkeepsie, who might go beserk, or whatever, and that's why they need to surveil your Google history, "just in case you might flip out and 'take out the town'", ahem)

Read this scary, recent Rolling Stone article on FBI and JTTF bad sleuthing skills. Durova would fit right in - that's not evidence, but what you said about 2-3 levels of distension isn't really cogent.

Only recently have they begun outsourcing, and it will be the firm known for Iraq work, CACI. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/huh.gif)

Alternatively, the FBI *has* been massively hiring in-house, since 9/11, re:

• (2004) - FBI Launches Hiring Blitz Since the Sept 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the FBI is launching an unprecedented national advertising campaign to hire about 900 additional analysts.
• (2004) Federal Bureau of Investigation - Press Release - The FBI is hiring more Intelligence Analysts than ever..! The FBI is kicking off an aggressive Intelligence Analyst hiring campaign and is tailoring its ...

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey:

I think it bears noting, that a few months (even weeks) ago, I would have spoken highly of the FBI, because like you, Moulton, I had a good impression of the FBI as being professional, talented crime fighters.

YES. And the past month has been like finding out there is no Santa Claus. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)






Or that Santa Claus is a very, very bad man. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/huh.gif)

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey:

It occurs to me that there are more than a few here who would assert that Durova is a terrorist attack, full stop. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

It occurs to me that there are more than a few here who would assert that Durova is a terrorist attack, full stop. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

I don't think that such hyperbolic language (the "T" word) helps anyone, or the situation in general.

That word is emotionally charged and loaded with implications that shut down communication.

Durova does a lot of needless damage. This is without question.

Sorry, still haven't seen any evidence. This is ridiculous.

Sorry, still haven't seen any evidence. This is ridiculous.

No. It's not ridiculous.

Frankly, it is not appropriate to give out the full information in this forum. You can think what you want.

With all due respect.

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey:

So, when will we know? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Where I come from (the academic and scientific community), we build our theories on evidence and reasoning.

What I mean by "when will we know?" is, DL, will you hear about this report thing soon and let us know one way or the other? Don't keep us in suspense now lol I expect to see it in, if not the Guardian, at least the Register (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Sorry, still haven't seen any evidence. This is ridiculous.

No. It's not ridiculous.

Frankly, it is not appropriate to give out the full information in this forum. You can think what you want.

With all due respect.

So... you're basically posting unsourced allegations against a private person in a public forum which is visible to Google and refusing to provide evidence... hey, isn't that what we criticise Wikipedia for doing?

This post has been edited by KamrynMatika:

Kamryn is right. It's an unethical practice, whether WP does it to someone here, or whether we do it here to someone at WP.