>www.wired.com/2010/07/exclusive-google-cia/

JFC, that's a meaty article

>>325904

unironically this tbh

http:// archive.is/88cXh

here's the archive for the article, in case anons don't want to feed them clicks

>>325939

mouse-hovering the photo reveals 'obama_schmidt'

>>325966

no problem. this place is a sounding board. we are all wrong sometimes and right sometimes.

in this case, it seems the pic is king nigger and ES

>>326006

40/60

>>326016

probably state department

>>326068

eh, if you want to get technical, they're communists. and they don't care which method - as long as they take control

>>326206

yes. if the world were fully redpilled about (((them))) en masse, the hollow cost would be a fucking carousel ride in comparison

>>326319

are you serious? GHWB was one of the "tramps" in dallas

>>326319

>>326322

shit. ignore me. i read the conversation incorrectly

>>326329

see

>>326327

>>326328

>Cathy O'Brien

i don't find her to be entirely credible

>>326368

OPSEC is the responsibility of the end user. it can't be much different from what google collects on you every day

>>326427

>in my opinion

>>326471

anon, you got a non-pdf version of whatever that is?

>>326482

this kike shill can't even engrish