I wonder if those involved here passed their polygraph tests?

[T.M. Cullen]

China has infiltrated the largest signals intelligence collection facility outside of Fort Meade.

http://washingtontimes.com/article/20071221/NATION/676409066/1001

Military and civilian personnel assigned there are dutifully polygraphed.

What the hell happened?!!!!@

[EJohnson]

Wait for it......................more outsourced intelligence.  

[George W. Maschke]

For some thoughtful commentary see:

http://idolator.typepad.com/intelfusion/2007/12/did-chinese-int.html

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/12/from-the-intrep.html

[T.M. Cullen]

George,

I spoke with a former korean navy linguist who worked there recently and  she confirmed the story.   In fact, she is the one who first mentioned it to me.  Since I used to work there it really peaked my interest.  It was only then that I found the article by Gertz.

Yeah, they're outsourcing crypto-linguistic work that could be done by experts in the field who came up "false positive" on the stupid Poly!

Maybe they can put all those illegal aliens to work at the NSA.

If it wasn't the nation's security at stake, I'd laugh!


A.A

[T.M. Cullen]

I also take exception to the following from the 2nd link:

"Chinese is one of the toughest languages to learn. Having lived and worked with Chinese linguists for years, I know that you can spend almost every waking hour trying to master the subtleties of tone and volume of vocab -- and still come up short when compared to a native speaker. Which is why those people tend to occupy the top tier linguist positions, correcting and/or refining the work of those with lesser expertise. A compromised native son or daughter – the default tactic of Beijing spymasters - could have a significant impact on our understanding of Chinese activities and intentions (based on signals intelligence) over time."

Yeah, well I WAS a chinese linguist in the SIGINT field for years and can tell you that whether or not your "tones" are accurate don't matter diddly squat.  Listening ability, with a really good knowledge of the target is paramount.

Those "native" linguists I worked with, for the most part didn't know squat.  Didn't know technical terms, didn't know the difference between a aircraft carrier and a M1 abrams tank!

Having BOTH a native speaker of the SOURCE language AND a technologically knowledgeable native speaker of English was optimal.

Actually, there has always been a heated debate regarding whether a native or non-native is best.