IG Report Confirms Hate Speech in Classified IC Chat Rooms
Discover more from SpyTalk
IG Report Confirms Hate Speech in Classified IC Chat Rooms
But it excoriate the whistleblowers who brought it to spy agencies' attention
UPDATED
An investigation by the Intelligence Community’s Inspector General has confirmed what SpyTalk first exclusively reported over a year ago: That a classified chat channel used by alphabet-agency employees was fouled by “transphobia, hate speech and misogynistic discussions.”
The misuse of the Intelink chat rooms for voicing and exchanging hate speech has been “systemic,” the IG said in its undated report, first revealed Wednesday by The Washington Post’s Tim Starks.
SpyTalk based its March 2022 report mainly on a personal blog written by Dan Gilmore, a former mid-level administrator of the Intelink chat rooms, who said that the system “became a dumpster fire” of hate speech around 2019, during the administration of President Donald Trump, who had refused to condemn neo-Nazis who organized a provocative march in Charlottesville, VA. “Professionalism was thrown out the window, and flame wars became routine,” wrote Gilmore, a 30-year veteran of Navy and NSA cryptologic systems.
SpyTalk subsequently reported in March 2022 that the House and Senate intelligence committees were looking into the allegations and making inquiries to the relevant agencies.
The IG report corroborated many of Gilmore’s claims. It echoed his complaints that there was “a pattern of behavior by IC individuals that did not align with the terms of use of U.S. Government systems. For example, the submissions included allegations that lC individuals engaged in inappropriate political and social commentary, and used derogatory and offensive language while communicating with each other.”
Kill the Messenger
But the IG came down heavier on Gilmore and another whistleblower (both of whose names are blacked out in the report), for engaging with purveyors of commentary that they disagreed with, which included some IC employees’ support for the Jan. 6 insurrection—and going out of channels to report it.
The IG “focused heavily on the propriety of a contractor trying to uncover misconduct — with the watchdog finding that the contractor didn’t have permission to investigate the messages,” Starks wrote.
At the same time, the IG gave a pass for now to the “misuse” of the chat rooms, saying the hate speech was “outside the scope” of its investigation and would not be addressed in the report.
The IG report, which, in an unusual step, blacked out the name of the official who wrote it (out of fear of being “doxxed” by rightwing zealots, Gilmore theorized) gave the whistleblowers faint praise for taking the initiative to report the hate speech.
"To be clear, [redacted] motivation to identify and report bigotry and hate speech on IC systems is appropriate and desirable,” it said. “Improper use of IC communications can, and should be reported through properly recognized channels within the IC. [Redacted]] however, materially exceeded [redacted]] authority in this regard by unilaterally persisting in this agenda after being given multiple lawful directives to cease and desist [redacted] activity. Our final report of investigation detailing our investigative activity, and findings is attached.”
Tara Lemieux, a senior cybersecurity assessor contractor for the Defense Department who worked for the Intelink program from 2012 to 2016, blasted the IG’s report and its negative emphasis on the whistleblowers.
“If anything, this report confirms that our system is broken and those who previously would have lost their clearance are instead being protected and encouraged to stay,” she told SpyTalk.
“In my tenure with Dan on the Intelink project, we operated with unwavering ethics and accountability…Now…the IG has chosen bureaucratic technicalities over [the] right action. Rather than address the issue, they restored the messages and dismissed Dan for upholding our ethical standards.”
“This isn’t about mere messages,” she concluded, “It’s a breach of integrity within the Intelligence Community. To those who ignored duty for the convenience of passing that buck: You’ve failed us all.”
The Barn Door
The IG report essentially said it’s past time for the intelligence agencies to police the racist and misogynistic rantings of employees—all of whom hold security clearances ranging from “Secret” to above Top Secret—and to establish better systems for reporting “violations of the Interlink Terms of Use Agreement.”
Dan Gilmore was not impressed, especially when it comes to disciplining or revoking the security clearances of hate mongers populating the IC chat rooms.
“The ODNI report is complete bullshit,” he told SpyTalk. “They send something out to make themsselves look good, as p.r.—and not a thing will happen.” He quickly added, “I hope I’m wrong.”
You can read it for yourselves here. ###
This piece has been updated to clarify that there were two whistleblowers criticized in the IG report. It also adds Gilmore’s dismissive opinion on the IG report from an interview on Friday, Aug. 18.
IG Report Confirms Hate Speech in Classified IC Chat Rooms
Why haven't there been consequences for this out of line behavior? Do the people who were participating in this hateful speech still have their clearances? Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
I suspect that there are more than a few members of the Armed Forces and the Intelligence Committee who harbor extremist views. However if they are stupid enough to bare them on a government network, that alone should be grounds for revoking a security clearance.