The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Richard, Tulare, CA — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 18:59:28 GMT

Our tax dollars at work.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

trouble — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:18:07 GMT

Nice work. You probably just uncovered one the exact locations they wanted you to uncover. They are probably laughing their Azzes off right now at this article.

The only thing you found is exactly what they wanted you to find.

Funny!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Tino — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:20:10 GMT

I thought this was very funny.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

John Doe, Rural Washington State — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:26:04 GMT

Several years ago, the FBI was conducting anti-drug surveilance from my father's rural farm. Imagine this: An obvious gov't car parked in a 5 acre field and a guy in a suit crouched behind a fence and looking through binoculars across the highway. Not too subtle as he was visible from the highway. They also attempted to put a dummy electric transformer, containing a camera, on a power pole but messed up another neighbors driveway. When accosted by the neighbor, who wanted the "power company" to fix the damage, they first attempted to drive away and then sheepishly identified themselves as fbi.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Rich, Orlando Florida — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:26:29 GMT

And then we wonder why terrorists beat our systems and defenses. The truth is that the agents are just people who do the same job day after day, no different than any other person. Tell me that you don't become lackadaisical in your day to day job. We expect the federal government and specifically FBI/CIA to be super human and not fall into the pitfalls of "normal man".

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

George F. Valle, Miami, Florida — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:29:44 GMT

Didn't the FBI report to AG Alberto Gonzalez and now Michael Mukasey? Don't they report to W. Bush?

Regardless how good rank and file are, organizations are run top down and reflect the attributes of their bosses such as incompetence, arrogance, dishonesty, etc. Should we say more? if not for that your report and that of the Chicago Tribune would never have been possible.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

john doe, seattle, wash — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:33:09 GMT

that is really cool

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Bri — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:34:58 GMT

No wonder why NBc ghas the lowest ratings of any network for news. People don't like traitors.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Raul,Miami Florida — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:58:15 GMT

These people are either naturally stupid, or their brains got hijacked!!!These people(FBI) are supposed to protect us???? Yeah,sure!!!!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Michael Holt — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:05:05 GMT

The obvious cameras / Safe-house are simply a diversion for the actual surveillance. One would have to asume~

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Rick Bissell, Avilton, Maryland — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:09:58 GMT

Mr. Popkin: Thanks for your somewhat enlightening but mostly humorous article here. Don't be surprised if your house is soon decorated with such cameras sprouting from a neighbor's home or perhaps a parked van with blacked out windows! Back in the early 1980s my wife was trailed by the same 4 men in a taxi wherever she went in Pinochet's Chile. The use of visible spies is meant to threaten and harass, not to really gain any secret information. I have no reason to believe that Pinochet's thugs hadn't been trained by J.Edgar Hoover's FBI.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Gabriel P., San Diego, CA — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:11:55 GMT

What good does telling this story to the country do? Fine, do some investigating and inform these agancies of the information found, but informing the rest of society is not necessary. Leave it to the liberal media to inform our enemies of our every move and any weakness our country may have. Sure, it may not have been to hard to find with a little research, but why annouce any findings to the world?

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Pistol P, Detroit, MI — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:12:22 GMT

That the U.S. government has surveillance cameras trained on foreign embassies is certainly NOT secret to anyone, including the subject embassy. It is the very intention of the FBI for the cameras to be noticed.

The FBI would not conduct surveillance from a safehouse. Quite probably the author doesn't know what the term implies. How this article qualifies as newsworthy is obviously questionable.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

D.D. Rocky — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:15:25 GMT

What is the best way to hide. In veiw of everyone. When your looking at that house with the camras, thsy could be behind you, looking at you. Hmmmmm ?

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Bob, Sacramento CA — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:15:43 GMT

That's hilarious. No wonder the Russian mafia and other assorted terrorist organizations laugh at our "justice system". To them we are nothing more than the Keystone Kops

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

paul vanwijk, goldsboro nc — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:24:28 GMT

in plain sight, cameras appear to be late 80's
early 90's models. they may not even work.
although funny im sure the real stuff is well
hidden.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

L.D. McCoy — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:27:48 GMT

Ya know? for the past few years, I've seen reports like this, and others detailing troop deployment to hot spots around the world, exposes of Cia houses, and FBI operations.. etc etc etc..

If this was WWII, you and your company would be in really hot water right now.

Whether or not the embassy in question knew it, I'm sure that if they didn't, (even though doubtfull that it didn't), THEY DO NOW!!!

And the poor scmuck that did the "really a spy thing", is probably in rather warm if not very hot water now.

Good job MSNBC... NOT!!!!

Whatever happened to real patriotism??
You DON'T give away american secrets, even if a simple internet search and a couple of dollars will give you that info anyway.

I just don't understand how a lot of so called Americans think any more.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Chris, Washington, D.C. — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:42:18 GMT

Is this the work of a "Senior Investigative Producer"? (yawn)...zzzzzz...news business must really be slow. How 'bout turning that "steel trap" investigative mind and resource base on identifying the local crack houses, meth labs, opium parlors, etal. If you're going to 'make noise', how 'bout making a contribution with it!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

J Small, Venice FL — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:44:59 GMT

That is the oldest trick in the book. I mean didn't you guys ever even watch Columbo. But then again you are journalists and to quote one of your own.

"We journalists make it a point to know very little about an extremely wide variety of topics; this is how we stay objective."---Dave Barry

Objective is one word, ignorance is a better one.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Charles, New York — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:45:35 GMT

Well... Give it 6 months and his job description will probably be finally updated. It should read something along the lines of... Clerk... really a janitor now.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Traci Madison, San Diego, CA — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:57:39 GMT

That Washington D.C. house, in all likelihood, is conducting video surveillance of the embassy, not providing a "safe house" for someone who needs to be hidden for awhile.

Safe houses are more likely to be located in suburbs or remote areas with little public access, not on Embassy Row.

Besides cameras, there is probably electronic remote tapping and targeted sound gathering. Much more goes on during intelligence gathering than is visible or known to the public.

Of course embassy security personnel know the game and have multiple devices to try to block FBI efforts. Jim Popkin, the article's author, certainly did not reveal anything unknown to diplomatic personnel and staff.

Remember that many of the embassy employees also have a mission to collect useful information about us, our economy, politics, and elected or selected public figures, etc.

Remember: Intelligence (spying) is the world's second oldest profession.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Benjamin — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:59:38 GMT

Unreal.. hostile, silly people. I cannot imagine what it must be like to walk around being so paranoid and bitter. I'll bet you see so many things everyday that make you angry. "Liberal media", "traitors". Plots all around you. Why don't you gather up the family and move down to your fallout shelter. Good lord.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

M., somewhere, not DC — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 21:22:52 GMT

As a once long time resident of the DC area, it's "common knowlege" that the areas around the embasies, specifically the one cited in the article, are under constant heavy and obvious survailance... The residents of the area and the Embasy being watched know it and have for decades, Doesn't anyone remember when this same embasy was discovered to be infested with all manner of "bugs"??? and I don't mean roaches! A maxum of survailance is let them see what you want them to see but keep hidden what you desire hidden... anyone think deeper into what is not as obvious as cameras in an attic?? Perhaps the FBI is not so clumsy as depicted...

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

J.Lane, Portsmouth, RI — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 21:26:11 GMT

Grow up, nobody gave away any secrets, no new information was revealed, and to the idiot who said the cameras were late 80's or early 90's, get out of your mom's basement and get a job, you don't know that. It has been common knowledge for 30 years that we watch our friends and enemies. If you were to stupid to pick up a newspaper in the last 3 decades and read about it, then your just plain ignorant.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

aw — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 21:31:51 GMT

yea right..sheeeshhh

the people in/of the "embassy of one of our former Cold War adversaries"... knew about this stuff probably before it was installed...

DOH..

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Fillup SF CA — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 21:32:57 GMT

The government at work, nothing new.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Jacob, Pompano Beach, FL — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 21:45:50 GMT

"Whatever happened to real patriotism??
You DON'T give away american secrets, even if a simple internet search and a couple of dollars will give you that info anyway.

I just don't understand how a lot of so called Americans think any more. "

I completely agree, and even as a "liberal" who is a little skeptical of certain agencies, just throwing info like this out for the petty sake of a news story is just ridiculous! and in no way warrants any appraise. Even if it is publicly accessible doesn't mean most people here should be informed about it. Whether it was a front or the real thing, I am sure there was a reason why the public wasn't aware of it, and if someone of the public were to find out about it alone, then let them find out about it alone we don't need news stories like this haha. This is just as important to the public and just as stupid as some magazine believing that the public "just has to know!" where Lindsay Lohan was drinking last night, sheesh! That's the problem we "don't think" anymore, the media became irrelevant and not worthy back when journalists and reporters started trying to become stars instead of just journalists and reporters.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

TJ, Gambier, Ohio — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 21:50:04 GMT

In 1966 I visited the Russian Embassy in DC to obtain visas for a group of journalists visiting Moscow. Two months later I was called to FBI headquarters in DC for questioning. The FBI had traced my car license plate but contacted me at my office in the Department of Commerce. They then tried to recruit me as an agent!

Old news.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

jhenderson8@comcast.net — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 21:57:34 GMT

For some people, who don't think the government is responsible for some imagined conspiracy, this is good news. The FBI is as human as the people who work there and they screw up things about as often as the rest of us humans. If things seem "too weird to be true" they probably aren't.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

not syupid, Seattle area — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 22:10:02 GMT

Got to laugh at the collective of IDIOTS who blame NBC for uncovering what wasn't "hidden" all that well.

I have no doubt that they THOUGHT they were "covered" , but didn't THINK about it. Typical gummint mentality We don't CARE - we DON'T NEED TO.

Typical response by some - "SHOOT THE MESSENGER!!"

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Dave Laster, Dallas, TX — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 22:11:15 GMT

Sounds like business as usual at any govenment agency. Just do the task, in this case spying, don't worry about the quality of work if any work is being done at all. Do we even know if the tapes were even looked at? I would guess NO!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Mack — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 22:31:20 GMT

Now this is a funny story! To the Super-Patriots out there this story is not from a traitor, but from someone reporting an interesting article that was informative. Yelling traitor at a newsperson is a way you all try and censor freedom of the press. Think about it commies (returns the name calling).

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Not a Spy — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 22:40:47 GMT

I love just reading the comments on the article. So, everyone here watches a few crime drama's and they are all suddenly experts on the FBI and CIA? "Safe houses are more likely to be located in suburbs or remote areas with little public access, not on Embassy Row." Really? How many of you have actually worked for the FBI or CIA? . . . I'm betting none of you. The best comment had to be "The only thing you found is exactly what they wanted you to find." Ohhh, does that give anyone else chills? Didn't think so.

I think this article was written to be amusing and also to poke fun at the Spooks. We all need a laugh at their expense once in a while right? So, everyone, just lighten up a bit. And what's with this guy? "People don't like traitors." Maybe that was supposed to be funny . . . Ha ha

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Robbie, Stpete, Florida — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 22:46:04 GMT

First of all you really don't give the FBI credit. If I was going to spy on another country or possibly weed out the spies and traders I would use a decoy house/building, conceal its purpose and technology to a point were the obvious is gone. Once they think they found our hiding spot facing the front door they begin to feel safe going in the side door because they know the cameras we have up can see them. Now you setup your real high-tech surveillance in the direction they feel more comfortable and lax.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

John Dough — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 22:53:15 GMT

Dumb...dumb...dumb...dumb...(think Dragnet, or some other spy theme)

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

David, Central Illinois — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:04:45 GMT

I really worry about the state of our union when voters are so naïve that they believe our politicians haven’t been spying on everyone since the 50’s. The only time we are actually informed about the spy technology our government uses is when it has been retired and newer technology has replaced it. We were told about the U-2 after it was replaced by the SR-71, and then informed about the SR-71 when it was replaced by newer stealth technology. If something is so oblivious that people walking by can see it then they must want people to know, otherwise it would still be a well kept secret.
My point is that since the cameras were visible to the foreign embassy and everyone else passing by, and the information was available to anyone with an internet connection, nothing was “outed” by this article, unlike the “outing” of Valerie Plame!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Borris Abramov, St. Petersburg, Russia — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:07:45 GMT

Aye comrade, suppress your press and talk down anyone who dares to bring attention to government stupidity, corruption, ignorance or shame and we shall reward you with your very own dacha by the great salt lake in Utah when we take over your corrupt institutions of Amerika.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Joe Millionaire, Across the Street, DC — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:18:57 GMT

"Leave it to the liberal media to inform our enemies of our every move and any weakness our country may have. Sure, it may not have been to hard to find with a little research, but why annouce any findings to the world? "

Oh yeah, our "enemies" (despire the fact they have embassies in this country) are so stupid they couldn't or wouldn't figure this out.

There are two points in releasing this information. 1) Ratings. That's how ALL news generates revenue... 2) Because had they simply informed the government, it's most likely that nothing would have been for at least 10 years.

Not to mention that putting a news story about such a thing and calling the reporters traitors is like saying Lou Dobbs is a traitor for his "Broken Border" series.

As far as the FBI being discreet, please. Back in 1995, I used to go Crystal City Mall to attend 2600 Club meetings. It really didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the "mall shoppers" with dark glasses and hats and wigs flashing pictures with miniature cameras were the FBI.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Aldiniest Springfield MA — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:24:06 GMT

FBI is a joke. I called Boston field office months ago and began conversation by saying I had truly hard evidence about 2001 anthrax attack. FBI receptionist cut me off, said I could not possibly have such information, and hung up on me. I had hardly said a word. I called NYC anti-terrorist phone line. Same result. This is how FBI fights terrorism?

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Mark, Longmont, CO. — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:27:40 GMT

I am a retired military member who has studied and lectured on the subjects of SIGSEC (Signals Security and COMSEC (Communications Security). Our mission was to inform servicemembers and at times family members (unclassifed versions)of the importance of not disclosing ANY information that had the POTENTIAL of revealing unit movements, strengths,weaknesses...etc. This is to deny our enemies any piece to the puzzle. Thanks for handing over a piece. I'm sure your conscience is clear. What say you make yourself really useful and locate Bin Laden or other major players in the terror network and help the rest of the world out???.....OH my Bad...it's easier to help them and not place yourself in danger, but rather possibly place an American in harms way by reporting our weaknesses. Thanks

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

bob — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:31:21 GMT

wow so many upset people. if it is really that easy to find out info then it should be printed. and if it is that easy for a reporter to find out that info then don't you think a terrorist organization or another government would have better tools to find the info. i like this republican brand of thinking. anything negative that is said or printed about this country comes from someone who is a traitor and unpatriotic. hey maybe the reported loves this country so much he is trying to expose problems so they can be fixed. anyone ever think of that

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Could be a spy... somewhere in the U.S. — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:33:30 GMT

To "Not a spy": You lost your bet. At least one of the posters above IS or HAS BEEN a spy of a government agency. His/her info is NOT from crime dramas, but real spy life. This poster obviously does not identify him/herself as being "in the business" because he/she knows how to be discreet.

Intelligence officers love to read articles about their tradecraft, so this article and blog is certainly being read by them... and laughed at for the writer's ignorance or humor.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

J F Seattle — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:38:37 GMT

I am laughing harder at those who comment how revealing flaws in our government system is unamerican and how NBC news is a bunch of traitors than at the findings themselves.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Someone, Somewhere, Sometime — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 00:06:24 GMT

All you people complaining about "liberal media" and their exposing all our little secrect really need to pull their head out. I mean really, since when did we become a police state? Boo hooo your giving the ememy things to use against us. Grow up, get a brain and perhaps even use it. I think there still is freedom of speech left in our country. I wish they would publish more, about all our corrupt government, torture and corporate scams that seem to be going on. All I see is the freaks saying crap like this "Whatever happened to real patriotism??
You DON'T give away american secrets, even if a simple internet search and a couple of dollars will give you that info anyway."
Being a patriot is not that, it is caring for your country, and that includes speaking out against wrongs.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Alan Smith, Columbus Georgia — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 00:10:05 GMT

exactly, i mean come on
if they really didnt want you to see it then you would not be able to see it
this was clearly ment to be found

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Mark, Longmont, CO. — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 00:10:13 GMT

I'm not saying revealing information is "unamerican". I'm saying that common sense needs to come into play when "exposing" flaws. I'm positive that those who have commented that it's basically "OK" to give up Info that can potentially place those who work to keep our nation and it's citizens safe (military,FBI,CIA...) obviously have never been in hostile situations/areas and don't really care about their safety.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

MIKE KIRBY — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 00:47:04 GMT

yeah of course you guys don't put up my last spread because I pointed the media out on things like this. Keep your mouths shut.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Fri, 28 Mar 2008 01:05:06 GMT

To Someone, Somewhere....
You obviously have not spent a lot of time with your eyes open recently. American citizens are being detained, when moving from one piece of American soil to another piece, through American waters, by the U.S. Border Patrol, questioned, and made to provide identification, and to give reason for their travels. Does that sound like Nazi Germany to you? Look into it... Washington State ferry systems are doing this now. Not to mention the limitless wiretaps, data incursions, and packet sniffing going on under the guise of Homeland Security.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Zach — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 01:22:24 GMT

Sounds like a tongue in cheek joke between the employees at the Embassy ad the FBI .... give me a break.. they would not use a damn camera pointed at such an angle ... whats it supposed to catch ... whatever happens to be in the line of sight?

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Fisurman, Indiana — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 01:41:27 GMT

What do you really gain by posting this story. So you can see the camera, big deal. There are a lot of other important stories worth printing. Why try and disrupt the lives of hard working Americans trying to keep the country safe from those trying to steal our secrets and harm the United States. Now granted the guy is an idiot for putting "really a spy" on anything. This guy is in the wrong line of work. They teach you discretion from day one in this type of work and this guy did not get the memo. I think sending him to Memphis is worse then firing him. That place is horrible.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Dean R, Va Beach, VA — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 01:50:02 GMT

Oh, for crying out loud! Rather than expound Doomsday theories about how the "liberal media" is killing Americans, how about we fire up both of those brain cells and think a moment.

Cameras in attic skylight = danger to PFC Jones in Kabul. HUH? Let's see that logical link, pal!

While we're busy pointing fingers, let's point some at the US Navy for admitting that our subs used to tap into Soviet undersea telephone cables. And the USAF for admitting the existence of the B-2 and F-117. Now THERE'S a bunch of liberal traitors for ya!

As a side issue - if there is a "liberal media", then logically it implies the existence of a "non-liberal media". What would that be? "Non-liberal" = "conservative"...oh, I know! "Conservative media"! That would be Rush Limbaugh inciting voter fraud and encouraging criminal behavior (in between handfuls of his false-prescription, illegally obtained drugs), right?

Can't ya'll stop being bipedal parrots and at least THINK before you start mouthing off buzzwords?

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Karen, Columbia, Missouri — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:30:06 GMT

Great story. Ignore the negative comments. Journalists should do more stories like this that expose failures of the government.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Jack Authrey — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:36:07 GMT

You're ALL lost in the fabled "wilderness of mirrors", as James Angleton once said of the counterintelligence field. Just Google "Robert Philip Hanssen" - you'll see what I mean.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

CwMoxy — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:37:15 GMT

I know this really a spy, he's an idiot and his ego will cost many lives not to mention the reality of his traderdom...just another wananbe...reality, it took an idiot to hire really a spy...

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Still A Spy — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:39:28 GMT

When I worked in Russia, I knew where all their cameras were.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Jason, California — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:41:40 GMT

Those a HUGE clunky old cameras, with the technology available now, cameras are so small they cant barely be seen. Im positive they want these cameras seen, they probably arent on, its only obvious they want people to see the camera, the man who wrote this article needs to do some real reporting. This is a waste!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

richard martin, houston tx — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:54:24 GMT

like the embassy didn't know they were under surveillance.this is humor. do you really think a spy would show up at the embassy? one would naturally assume the embassy phones were listened to, office was bugged, traffic was monitored. its been going on a long time. lighten up.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

DJ, Vegas — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:07:41 GMT

From the beginning of time in both the animal kingdom and human societies fear has been used to control and motivate the respective societies members. Tribal, religious and political leaders subsequently discovered that lying to and about their enemies AND members of their own societal group was highly effective in achieving this goal.

For the many of you who just fell off of the turnip truck here's the 411:

Governments and politicians lie.

Freedom of the press surpasses the Governments rights to perpetuate any conspiracy.

Having a common enemy (imagined or not) only temporarily detracts attention from the flaws already existing.

The truth shall set you free.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

C. Newman, mayfield, kansas — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:08:45 GMT

There is no such thing as common sense anymore. The media and the PC police have made common sense
a thing of the past, Sadly

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Nicol, Rochester, NY — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:08:45 GMT

There's some of us out here that are glad the FBI guys/gals are out there. We appreciate the work they do - most of the time without recognition. They only seem to be noticed when they don't do everything perfectly.
I often amaze friends and family with the amount of personal information I can find on them online. Mortgages, divorces, births, bankruptcies, etc. It's out there if you learn how to creatively search. There's no special skill involved. Now I want to go to Live to see if I can find the place, hahaha.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

KASEY, NYC, NY — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:29:23 GMT

WHO YOU GONNA CALL?............................

not the FBI

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Andrea, Cincinnati, Ohio — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:30:33 GMT

To Mark: Obviously never been in hostile situations/areas? Sir,your assumptions have a lot in common with an alligator's mouth and a blue jay's a**. I for one would rather stand for the constitution than for any person. I believe that is what true patriotism is about.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Carlson Guitars, Portland, Oregon USA — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:32:32 GMT

What is really outrageous is the use of DOT (dept. of transportation) cameras along highways, freeways, bridges, traffic signals, etc. to track the movement of "suspicious persons" or other people that have working surveillance tracking their every move. What's to say that someone, somewhere isn't tracking my movements - OR YOURS?!?! (I better be careful what I type, after all BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING!)

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Quist — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:37:51 GMT

Sounds to me like they're just collecting "just in case" intelligence. I'm guessing they are just streaming the footage elsewhere or have a couple of non-agent employees there to compile a timelog on movements into and out of the embassy.

I would hope that we have 24/7 footage on all foreign embassies as part of our intelligence/counter-intelligence efforts.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

April, Ontario, Can — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:45:19 GMT

I'm having a hard time reading all these complaints (no it's not that I cannot read) it's the fact that if it was so easy for a reporter to get this info, to think our "enemies" are too stupid to obtain this same info and then some is really sticking your head in the sand. But, at the end of it all, if these safe houses have been so easy to find...then the people that are using those houses are the ones that pay when they are found...maybe something more should be done on the government level...as I said if a news reporter was easily able to get this info legally what can our "enemies" do illegally...After 9-11, I think it shows our "enemies" don't play by the rules

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Mrs. Ed, Helena, MT — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:48:08 GMT

Nothing is perfect...government, citizens, employees and/or other people. Whatever view you have on the article, be happy you are able to read it, safely and without persecution for doing so. Be grateful you can express your opinion here. Make an effort to be respectful to and for those who are willing to lose everything so you may continue to enjoy the life you have. Think you can do better? Go after the job to protect people you'll never truly know and some you'll never meet. Run for office. At the very least vote.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Rick Toronto, Ontario — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:52:40 GMT

This is sooo obvious. They have a real camera inside the fake camera. And they photograph people who are looking up, searching for cameras. There's your spies.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

John Doe, Seattle, Wash — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:54:53 GMT

I like how the "commercial database that NBC and many media organizations use" includes SSN information. Why are reporters entitled to have SSN's for anyone they choose for $2 per search?

I don't know about those skylights, but some of the shingles on that roof could use some work...

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

JT Collier Gilbert, AZ — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:55:56 GMT

Why report on this? Is it not the medias job to filter what they publish when in the interest of the security of our nation? Seems like the media, no matter who or where should find other stories.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Cheska, Boulder, CO — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 04:18:06 GMT

"...possibly place an American in harms way by reporting our weaknesses..." Funny, very funny. Cold war funny.
As if this story was the first warning that the govt has heard. If someone won't listen to your whispers of warning, you need to shout. That's what NBC did, and they got ratings (and profit) out of it too. I bet you think that NBC's intelligence gathering is better than the government's enemies.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Sara, Panama City, FL — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 04:18:55 GMT

people, People, PEOPLE. Please learn to proofread!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Sammy, Kuwait — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 04:31:40 GMT

Cameras doing double duty - cheap deterrence. From what I've read, there are no secrets within the spy industry.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Cameron, University of Wyoming — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 04:32:07 GMT

I find the logic employed by some of you "stupid liberal media" objectors to be laughably shortsighted and one-dimensional.

Try and follow basic, common sense logic a bit more down the line, past FBI secrets + news = liberal treason.

Postulate that a group of terrorists are preparing for an attack on the United States. These operations are not carefree, spur of the moment operations. The attacks on 9-11 were not instantly carried out. Planning, document falsification, and HEAVY SITE RESEARCH were carried out.

The point of highlighting such intelligence weaknesses is that if a simple, low-intensity search by a curious citizen can unveil weaknesses, a determined scouring by a committed and well-funded militant certainly will as well.

True patriotism is analyzing weaknesses in government and working to repair and/or change them, not blinding feeing off the White House's droppings and jumping down the throat of anyone who points out that America's security infrastructure is hardly perfect.

Try thinking critically, instead of doing critically little thinking.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Sawman — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 04:43:59 GMT

There is a line that should not be crossed when it comes to free speech. If you give information that can be used by our enemies against us, you are a traitor. This article provided information that may have not been previously considered by our muslim extremist brethren. Mr. Popkin should be publicly flogged.
"loose lips sink ships"

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Maine — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 04:46:11 GMT

Could be a mistake, could be real. has anyone ever heard of Counter-Intelligence?

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Jdoe — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 04:48:19 GMT

Many Americans confuse patriotism with complicity. Citizens have a right to know if those in charge of natonal security are being complacent.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Janie, Noplace — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 04:49:42 GMT

First: the watched embassy most certainly knows about the "cameras"--and did before this article--as many have already stated.

Second: the FBI intended for that embassy, or anyone else who noticed, to see the "cameras"--which as someone already said is old tech and probably non-operational.

Third: those who have written comments about the liberal media and who have accused the author of giving away American secrets have failed to use their brains for something other than sitting on. The FBI probably paid the author very well to publish this story.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

John Doe, Seattle, Washington .) heehee — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 04:54:51 GMT

They make me so confident in their Agency. I feel so safe now. Really. lol

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Katie Denver, Colorado — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 05:54:02 GMT

I just like looking at all of the grammatical errors people make when they get really upset. It kind of undermines people's arguments when they can't even speak their own language.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Itsme, South Carolina — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 06:11:26 GMT

Most everyone, including the writer, seems to have missed the real story.

The real story is that in the age of the internet and public records databases, keeping information hidden or presenting a cover story is becoming more difficult all the time.

Spies have long had access to search this type of data, now reporters can as well.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Kevin, Cumming Georgia — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 06:16:35 GMT

Do all these people really believe our government is this inept? The best way to get a clean profile of someones face is to place a camera in the opposite direction so they will turn to face the real camera. If they were really crafty they would make this camera semi visible just to appear stupid. Get real, they are exposing exactly what they want seen and using an unwitting media to perpetuate the myth of incompetence and inform everyone they want to photograph to keep their backs to the stupid American spy cameras. Quit over thinking something that should be obvious to anyone who understands basic diversionary tactics and slight of hand. Regarding the medias patriotism, they are doing their part in disseminating disinformation for the FBI at no cost to the tax payers. Thanks Guys, keep up the good work!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

kk — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 07:00:08 GMT

What kills me here is that so many of you can not effectively speak or write. While you're spouting hatred, you cannot even write grammatically correctly. I see "to" in lieu of "too" and "your" when it should be "you're". And the spelling is atrocious. Get yourselves into an English class before you start spouting hatred in writing.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Xavier Evo — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 07:42:25 GMT

Whatever....I doubt they were trying to hide anything...why would they care if anyone knew they were keeping watch. You unveiled no secret,

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

ayesha, anchorage, alaska — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 07:50:42 GMT

oh yeah, the "enemies" check out msnbc daily, to get info...lol
I doubht this article help or hurt anyone. and I do believe our FBI is better than that. perhaps, it wasn't too important to be hidden, so they left it quite obvious.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Helena Montana, Casper, WY — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 08:05:18 GMT

Shhhhh. Good Americans don't ask questions.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Last Iconoclast, Neverneverland. — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 08:33:52 GMT

A company that I once worked for was the subject of an FBI surveillance. I knew because the FBI were driving standard issue unmarked cop cars stuffed with agents wearing the same cheap suits and sunglasses. Rather than hang back, they would follow in close proximity, occasionally coming up to the side and peering in when we hit traffic. I would turn to look at them, and they would quickly turn away their gaze. It was like playing hide-and-seek with a 3 year old. Absolute amateur hour.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Tom, Newport,Mi. — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 08:53:15 GMT

You people should all get a life!!
If Everybody in America would mind their own danged business it would be a better place.
All of you are looking for YOUR 15 minutes of fame and should do something constructive with your life,ME-I,m going to work!!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Don't need to be a spy to have common sense — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:23:17 GMT

Love the comments. I really hope this article was meant to be humerous. Had to laugh at the "don't reveal our secrets" comments. Also had to laugh at the author's "discovery". I think the point of the cameras under the glass is to make them asthetically pleasing more than hidden. Cameras on poles would clutter the neighborhood. Hey Jim, next time you're at a gas station, look up. You might find some "secret" cameras to report there too ;)

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

John, Sedona, AZ — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:23:50 GMT

Completely useless information - again - Please stop treating the general public this poorly. We understand the requirement for security. We understand the flaws that occur with the scope and scale of maintaining that security. Please provide meaningful data; not perceived sensationalism. The time is coming (and moving at a more brisk pace than media conglomerates wish) where these current journalistic tactics will be completely rejected. The resultant monetary implosion will finally force an information presentation based upon factual & unbiased information.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Ben Dover, — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:48:27 GMT

HAHAHA- that is so bloody funny!!!!!! if you did the same thing in England, for example, it wouldn't have
Name: Joe Bloggs
Title: Spy
Company: MI5
it would be more like
Name: Joe Bloggs
Title: Manager
Company: Bob's Minicabs
and they would even have evidence of the cover story, e.g. they would use an actual private hire taxi, and it would make the cover story seem credible. But the FBI wont do that- they want the world to know who they are!!!!!!!!!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

John Doe, Virginia — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:52:16 GMT

Loose lips sink ships, loose liberal leftist media destroy countries. You liberal anti-American's wonder why our inttelligence services can't provide good intelligence? Because every time the intel operations are compromised, the enemy makes changes or kills the agents recruited by US intel. Why do you think it is so hard to get HUMINT sources in foreign countries, would you if you knew the US leftist/liberal media would give your name, address,phone number etc. to your enemies?
I can neither confirm nor deny that this surveillance is probably standard procedure since the "cold war" it is just a deterent to those liberal/leftist/terrorist within our country from sharing our senstive information with those countries. Intelligence is a hard enough job, without letting the average "Joe" knowing everything. Used to be classified info was on a "need to know" basis, however now adays due to people that wish to do us harm and liberal news groups and the Democrats force the agencies to expose operations. You people that were in support of this exposing of a security facility, need to look at the bigger picture other than your "game boy". One piece of the puzzle adds to the other pieces and before long hostile intelligence agents have the whole picture. I after having my life dissected from the age of 18 and again every 5 to 7 yrs am the biggest privacy advocate, but, there are things that go on behind the scenes that the public does not have "the need to know". contact the agency involved first and ask if they are aware of errors and get the story vetted before releasing it. Chances are the idiot that wwrote the article would have been given a go ahead to release the story after the agency made changes or moved ops.

Maybe a story about the illegals(criminals) & terrorists crossing our borders, destroying our neighborhoods and weaking our country, would be better use of band width.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

John B, San Antonio, TX — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:18:00 GMT

What's newsworthy about this story? I mean, apart from its clumsy attempt at "gotcha" journalism? There was no incident that precipitated it, so the sole intent of the story appears to be attacking the FBI and revealing information about the agency's operations to the general public.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Snow, Below the Beltway, MD — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:49:06 GMT

This is "clubbing baby seals" type journalism. Try doing something useful and informative for the community for once. I agree with "Chris" from the posting yesterday; Find out the locations of some of the crack houses here in DC. Expose some drug dealers, gang members, etc.
Give us an investigation that we can use.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Michael Clark, Tampa, FL — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:50:37 GMT

Dear Sir,
You sir I consider a Tratior. You call yourself an American and yet you call out the FBI in the national news. I for one will now be taking NBC links off of my WIndows Vita side panel and will be sure to avoid NBC on the T.V. from now on.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Richard,Milwaukee,WI — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:01:21 GMT

the comments from everyone are much more entertaining that the actual story - thanks all

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Carla, Midwest City, OK — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:13:38 GMT

I found the article entertaining but it does concern me as to which side your on. The article didn’t reveal any new worthy information, other than to let everyone know that your willing to do about anything for a story. Is this the first time that spy cameras outside an embassy was breaking news? Did you stop to wonder for a moment why the cameras were placed there? I’m not an investigative journalist, but I would have waited and continued to investigate to find out WHY the cameras were there rather than writing a new report that stated the obvious.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Mooney, Foxborough, MA — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:15:09 GMT

This has got to be the most idiotic news story ever.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Truth Teacher, Buffalo, NY — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:20:47 GMT

My, my, my. It would appear that the Nixon era mentality is still with us. As well as the J. Edgar mentality. IE: dont't tell anyone what you know--because if you do you're un-American and a traitor. Give it a break. This is the US of A and we do still have freedom of the press. And the press has better sense than to do what some White House officials' staff members have done--the press does NOT reveal names of active assets of Central Intelligence, nor the names of employees, other than those whose names are a matter of public record. IDing a "spy house" is no big deal, nor is it a breach of any kind of trust. If you want to get upset about something, then get upset about a White House that told a pack of lies to start another VietNam instead being bent out of shape about NBC and what stories they choose to publish.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

James Thomas, Selbyville, Delaware — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:30:29 GMT

Come on! The US didn't win the cold war by employing idiotic tactics. It should be obvious, even to reporters and the news media, that something we don't have the facts to evaluate is going on.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Steve, New York — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:32:19 GMT

Amusing article. Hopefully the cameras were meant to be seen but spooks being people who can say? Based on chat room behavior I bet there's a good chance one or more of the "real life spies" posting is a cheeto eatin Tom Clancy reading nerd.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

R Johnson, Augusta, GA — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:37:21 GMT

I wonder if NBC is surprised by the negative response to this story. I believe it is not because any damageing information is being revealed but because it touches a sore spot with millions of Americans repelled by all the "news" stories that give aid and comfort to our enemies.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Just Wondering, NYC — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:38:45 GMT

So, where was all this righteous indignation when the White House was outing Valerie Plame, a covert, CIA operative? Wasn't there anything "un-patriotic" about that?????

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Ruth, Milford,ME — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:50:02 GMT

it is still amazing to me that people will still revile those who reveal the truths and inadequacies of our government. Without truth, and these so called "unpatriotic" people, we would all be living in a bigger neverland than we already do. To assume that most Americans beleive that our government is looking after our best interests is ridiculous. People with more than 3 connected brain cells,and a few decades of life experience behind them, know that the government has not been a government "of the people, for the people or by the people" for a very long time, if ever. Learn your history folks!!! If we did, maybe we would stop repeating all the major mistakes of the past...ie...cold wars created out of fear and ignorance, hot wars created by the ignorance and ego of politicians, veterans being sent to war with a great pat on the back and a parade are coming back to indifference and a government that wont take care of their mental and physical injuries...the list is endless. Anyone that was alive in the late 60's and 70's should be feeling some deja vu right now.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Anyone usa — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 13:19:31 GMT

well the best thing is that if your being watched than you know someone still cares about you
what happens when that stops happening
ever think of it that way. maybe you should pay more attention to some of the good work and not so much on how neat of a super secret agent and how much of a better job at it than they are you could do

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

G-MAN — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 13:32:31 GMT

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.....................WE ARE SHOWN "ONLY" WHAT IS INTENDED TO BE VIEWED, GAURANTEED!!!!!!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

joe doe — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:00:27 GMT

who cares! there are survailance cameras everywhere - hidden and not hidden!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Ex G.I. Joe Columbo — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:08:53 GMT

Veddy Inteddestink! Vee haff vays to make you talk! ~smirk~

I just finished reading this article and accompanying comments posted up to Thursday, March 27, 2008 8:10 PM. I found it to be a stimulating exchange of ideas, which I believe is at the heart of the whole concept of allowing readers to blog about a published story.

When I arrived at the end where readers can send a comment, I see the notice posted:

"PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others."

OOPS! As far back as junior high, we were using sarcasm to attack each other's expressions of ideas. It's good to see that the more things(people)change, the more they stay the same!

BTW, I tend to agree with the "Loose lips sink ships" commentors. I believe that it is patriotic to notify the affected agency when a potentially harmful security weakness or procedure is discovered. I don't believe in exposing such in the name of the public's "right to know". As a former military member and former municipal police detective, I've seen too many instances of the media giving "stupid criminals" ideas on how to perpetrate crimes they weren't smart enough to figure out on their own.

And everyone is an expert on how the government(especially law enforcement)should be doing their jobs. Same thing with journalists!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

John Q Veteran — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:10:57 GMT

I enjoyed reading the responses even more than the article.
1. if the fbi wanted the cameras as a diversion they wouldn't have gone to the trouble of installing the skylights.
2. if the cameras are a diversion they serve absolutely no purpose. they are diverting no-one from anything. You think the so called 'spies' are going to turn their backs to the house and do their deals on the sidewalk?
3. The 'spy vs spy' posters who think this all somehow was engineered or works to the fbi's favour have obviously read to many novels and never actually worked at the trade.
4. American paranoia at work, yes you do have a habit of spying on your 'enemies' and 'allies'. I remember quite well the USA getting caught trying to spy on Canada from its embassy here. Was that so you could more accurately bomb our troops while we are out there saving your amatuer butts, as usual.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

John Q Veteran, from a free country, obviously not the USA — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:22:53 GMT

to Mr. Longmont, Co
Your comments regarding this article and your info regarding your expertise in the matter gives the best support for this article i have seen so far. Thank you.

As an aside, its not the writer putting americans in harms way it america putting americans in harm's way.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

K Lovering — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:22:53 GMT

I agree, instead of finding these so called "safe houses" find all the homes of drug dealers, crack houses, and all that! Now that would be news!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Imran, Lawrence, USA — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:36:50 GMT

OK you went through all that trouble to tell us about some supposedly secret cameras hidden behind windows.

For our own sanity care to tell us if there are cameras on the signals at major crossings in and around the same buildings?

We have cameras recording our actions at each and every step of the way and you make such a big deal out of this.

Heck even the UK our best pals and scratch buddies probably have cameras trained on our people and their own people in London.

This is tabloid journalism!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

D.D. Cooper — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:52:44 GMT

Hey Mark, Who needs enemys with friends like that?

And to think that we get to pay for this along with Hoovers skirts.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Mike, WA — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:53:03 GMT

To people like "trouble" above, the old adage, "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they are NOT after you..." ;) Really though, between the war, Katrina, 9/11, isn't it obvious that the Federal government is NOT run by some super-intelligent, ultra-efficient group?

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Liberal, Formal military — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:15:12 GMT

I guess if it was not to be seen it wouldn't. We have the most futuristic spy system in the world. we can take pictures of flies taking a crap, from a sattelite in space. This is purely a set house to intimidate. All of our Embassies are spied on by the same people that we are intimidating. we are better than that, as a matter of fact we are the best. We are not perfect but close to it. We don't make the rules we just conform them. God bless America!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

John — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:16:29 GMT

This is some funny stff what some people wrote.

Trouble, Alan Smith and J Small got it right the majority of you haven't figured it out yet.

The whole "really a spy" comment the cameras and how they are setup. Is just that a setup.

I am quite sure that the embassy has known about them the day they went up.

I loved the Columbo comment. It fit perfectly. a classic example of misdirectin and feigned ignorance. Speaking of which the journalist comment was a bit harsh but unfortunately true. It would have been a better story had the journalist seen it for what it was. Instead once again the article was written like most others seem to be in this day and age. Like something you would hear from a hormanal teenage drama queen. All emotion and no logic. Unfortunately the rest of you "patriots" are not much better.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Patriot, Savannah, GA — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:18:22 GMT

Did any of the "flamers" out there read the part in the story where NBC spoke with "several senior U.S. officials" before running the story? The US government has, on more than one occasion, relied on the general public and the media to identify weaknesses and fix those.

Do I agree with the publishing of classified troop movements? No, that is information that directly puts people into harms way. However, information such as this, is easily spotted, and since we are all patriots here, we can appreciate the freedom of speech and press that we have, that allow us to point out flaws, and hope that they are heard and remedied.

As someone familiar with the subject, and no I'm not a Cler-ReallyASpy, I can tell you that the DoD actually enlists the help of civilians, directly and indirectly. Several samples of DES and other algorithms encrypted data were published for public download by the DOD over the past 10-15 years with the intent of private hackers/crackers/hobbyists attempting to break it. Their line of thought, if a 15 year old with too much spare time can crack it and brag about it, we need to switch strategies.

I think the writer is more patriotic than the witch burners that hide behind patriotism to justify censorship. A person that makes use of the freedoms granted by those who protect us, is a patriot by their action. An individual that denies themselves, and wishes to deny others the freedoms under the ruse of protecting those that allow us the freedom.....well I guess you could just call that volunteer communism.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Bell St Louis,MO (rn_bll@yahoo.com) — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:43:25 GMT

I read the article and remember what my father always used to say " You just can't fix stupid"
and these people are protecting us.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

A Real American, Spokane, WA — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:43:33 GMT

I can't believe all the jokers who think you are being un-American for reporting this. It is a right for Americans to use free speech. It seems these "holier than thou" Americans would be up in arms if we were talking about gun rights, but believe that since you are talking about a "spy" house you are not allowed to use your free speech right and the Right of Information that we have in America. If they want strong government control and secrecy, I would recommend to them to move to China

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Dale, Washington D.C. — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:45:23 GMT

I agree that those camera's are probably not the ones gathering intel. The FBI agent may or may not have been at fault. What shocks the heck out of me are the responses on here. Traitor, unAmerican. Why is it if someone points out the faults or problems with the government they are called a traitor, unAmerican, unpatriotic? We have an obligation to question the government. Open you eyes and ears people because if you don't you may wake up someday and find out its 1984.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Buffalo, NY — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:53:32 GMT

In this day and age I would imagine that the FBI would use a far smaller camera and a far better concealed one and the information you found may be mixed up with a lot of other misleading information so no one really can tell from the outside (of FBI) who is really a spy and who is not. I highly doubt that the FBI would put up those kinds of cameras when you can go to a bank
ATM machine (or a Tim Hortons for that matter) and be videotaped without being able to figure out where the cameras are.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Good idea to have camera,Chicago,IL — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 16:15:52 GMT

Safe house? Safe for what? So the author hasn't read enough spy stories or wants our attention. So why does revealing the cameras' location do harm? Actually, they should be placed outside so everyone can see that America is protecting the embassies. Wouldn't it be really embarrassing if one of them should be taken over by some disgruntled expat? Federal facilities can/should do this for protection all the time. They get a "heads up" on potential problems and have tapes for the FBI later when something occurs.
We see that little businesses have security cameras in plain sight; but they're aimed incorrectly, have fuzzy images, etc. They should have better placement. Putting the cameras inside puts the camera in view, but serves as a protection for it.
As for the embassy, surely they already know they're being watched. That's why our traitors (Ames, etc.) never walked into foreign embassys without disguise. And wouldn't have parked their own car nearby.
The story is amusing, but not horrible, unpatriotic, etc. And the location was not disclosed.
As a nation, we are increasingly under surveillance. Major cities have cameras marked in high crime areas. Sometimes, they have flashing lights above them to notify everyone of their presence. We even put them in our own homes to monitor entry, the baby sitter, our children. When that occurs, spying is a "good thing".
Cameras are all over the workplace these days. Truckers and delivery people are being tracked via cell phone (GPS).
Having said all this, there is some merit to the patriot argument. Some dummy in some embassy somewhere might read this article and become informed. How likely is that?

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Go Back In Time — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 16:51:07 GMT

People, calm down, this reporter was not the first to discover this. Several years ago a similiar article was written. All this reporter has done is remind our "Cold War Adversaries" that the camera's are there, still. He also got someone fired probably. And as warm, and obviously humorous he may be, Do you really want someone like that working for our FBI?

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Rene Dz — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 16:51:36 GMT

"Plain sight" is an FBI tactic, they know what they are doing, diversion is the best weapon in counter intelligence

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Katherine, MI — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:27:35 GMT

Why put effort into hiding something the other team already knows is going to be out there somewhere. They KNOW we're spying on them. Why bother hiding it? Why waste time and exra money for more advanced, easily hidden, equipment when the persons being observed already KNOW they're being observed, even if they never see the cameras?

IMO, kudos to the FBI for not wasting any more of our tax money than you have to.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Shi-Hsia Hwa — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:31:55 GMT

For the people accusing journalists who run stories like this of being traitors: They are not. The function of reporting like this with respect to national security is analogous to the function of "white hat hackers" with respect to computer security. They're pointing out the holes so that they can be patched before the REAL bad guys find them.

You live in a country with freedom of the press. Appreciate it as a strength.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

john doe, seattle, wash — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:43:49 GMT

So either the feebs are smarter than to only have this place wried or the feebs really are stupid. I dunno - they had the guy in Boston cozying up to the mob and actually killing people; they couldn't figure out that a couple of Saudis learning how to fly planes but not land them might be up to something; they killed a mother and baby because they were trying to arrest her husband. With those clues, you gotta figure -- they are that supid.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Jessica, Somewhere in TX — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:18:00 GMT

Do you know why you all have the ability to say all of this???? Because of people like me who serve this country and fight the good fight so you can express your opinions without retalation of ANY kind. I invite you to go live in a 3rd world country if you don't like the way our wonderful country is being run. See how fast you come back.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Mike Wisconsin — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:28:32 GMT

Why is everybody so worked up about telling the world via news that there is an FBI house there?

If its that easy for the news to find this stuff, do you honestly think that anyone we don't want to know this hasn't already found out long ago?

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Edward Caldwell West Milford NJ — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 19:06:35 GMT

Fake photos, fake story. Based on the article's photos, the taker would have to be visiting the embassy and shooting down at the side of a slanted roof to shoot the three windows. If the image in the window is realy a camera, then it is photographing the roof at that angle. If legit, it appears to be an old camera with strap - possibly hanging on a nail.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

TheBroker, Minneapolis — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 19:09:11 GMT

The majority of you are pretty naive here.. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the FBI asked that this article be written. And those cameras are definitely 20+ years old. Unless the FBI wanted to disguise them to look that way (dripping with sarcasm).

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Dubuque, IA — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 19:54:22 GMT

It amuses me that so many people want to call the writer of this piece a terrorist, a traitor, or un-American.

How silly. It is the job of responsible Americans to question, criticize and investigate the actions of our government and its agents.

While the article is written with an air of levity, it does serve a purpose, and an important one at that.

This clerk/spy is supposed to defend this country from within and without, as is the agency he works for. The ineptitude demonstrated is quite disheartening, but unsurprising. Consider the problems of the September 11 attacks, and the failures of the intelligence community.

Is it treason to point these errors out, to question the government and its agencies' methods? No, it is the right thing to do. Will there be any impetus for change if everyone remains silent?

Only by being critical, being circumspect, and being open can we hope to do better in the future.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

steve, slo, ca — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:10:17 GMT

What's so hilarious is not the article, but the reader's responses. I would bet dollars to doughnuts that the folks who are criticising the FBI/Government for their incompetence are the same ones who rant and rave about the secrect power, influence and dastardly deads of the "shadow agencies". Powerful Dark Masters of deception AND incompetence? Y'all just enjoy criticising the government. Imagined Drama makes you happy.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

a guy from dayton ohio — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:23:38 GMT

Jim
Are you sure you don't work for a former cold war adversary?

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

RND — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:32:16 GMT

To one and all: GET A LIFE!
Stories to investigate:
1. Why aren't the Bear Sterns execs who made billions selling other people bad mortgages IN PRISON?
2. Why is our government outsourcing the making of our passports when they already know that the Chinese have stolen the secret of the computer chip that was supposed to make the passports safe? Could it be BID RIGGING to make MONEY for a Govt Printing Office Miscreant?
3. WHY DOES THE CONGRESS CONTINUE TO PASS LEGISLATION WITH EARMARKS?

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

RND New York — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:36:11 GMT

TO JIM POPKIN:
Forget the cameras and stupid database searches.
Find out why there are such people as REGISTERED LOBBYISTS.
Find out why politicians are allowed to accept multi thousand dollar campaign contributions.
Find out why our democracy has been sold out to corporations who have laws tailor made for them and passed by congress and state legislatures.
GET A LIFE!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

NA from D.C. — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:20:00 GMT

Wow, your all a bunch of morons. Pull your heads out of your fifth point of contact. Reporting the obvious is not unpatriotic, its just a slow news day. To also think the embassy did not know that we are monitoring them is even more pathetic. Grow up, move out of the basement and find a mate.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

citizen — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:20:07 GMT

Mr. Popkin,
The tone of your article was clearly one of ridicule: “Look how stupid our FBI is! Even a child could expose these secrets!” Either this really is a bungled surveillance operation, or it is a distraction intended to help conceal the real surveillance. So now the whole world must be told! For what purpose? Did you begin this investigation with the patriotic goal of helping our FBI to improve its performance and hopefully enhance our national security? If so, then congratulations for your civic mindedness. However, this goal could have been achieved more effectively by simply reporting your findings to the FBI. This would allow them to solve the problem without exposing a weakness to potential enemies – or do nothing if it was no more than a ruse. If it was a bungled operation, publicly embarrasing the FBI might be deserved, but is it the best way of addressing the problem? Unfortunately, quietly telling the FBI would have left you with no story to publish after many hours of work. After all, you are a reporter. You make your living and pay your bills by reporting the news, not by hiding it. Quietly reporting your findings to the FBI would not have enhanced your status as a reporter – no bonus - no feathers in your cap – no praise from your colleagues – no recognition for your public service - few would have known of your patriotic act. But it would have been the honorable thing to do. You could go to bed tonight knowing that you have helped your country. You might want to consider the fact that every day our intelligence services devote their time and skills and often take serious risks to protect us – and protect our right to criticize them. They do this knowing that they will probably never receive public recognition for their patriotism. They are not perfect, but do they deserve your ridicule? Rarely will their successes be reported. Failures are easy to detect and report – it requires little skill or effort to do this. I do not think you have seriously compromised national security. If this was a bungled operation, then our potential adversaries probably knew about this long ago and you revealed nothing. If it was a distracation – they probably knew that to. My main issue with your article is that your skills could have been put to better use. You could have applied yourself to exposing criminals or terrorists or corrupt public officials. You could have reported on the devestating consequences of illegal drug use. You could have reported on the link between political contributions from trial lawyers and failure to reform our corrupt liability system – or how much this corruption costs us for every product or service that we purchase. You could have spent your time providing a valuable public service. Instead you achieved personal notoriety by ridiculing dedicated public servants. I hope that with your next story we will see your time and skills applied in a more productive manner. Just a citizen, nothing more.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

John Snider, Yorba Linda, CA — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:30:03 GMT

Lets say that some dink at the FBI is embarrassed by this story and pulls the camera's the day before Bin Ladin (or his ilk) walks in to take delivery of a dirty bomb and we miss the foreknowledge due to breakdowns in the other myriad redundant systems. The perp then goes on to use the weapon and several thousand are killed/maimed/poisened etc.

What responsibility does this news agency bear? I am not nearly so interested in Freedom of the Press as I am in Responsibility of the Press.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

R Wyoming — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:02:12 GMT

SIGSEC/COMSEC
No need to post our resumes on the web to feign credibility. First of all, the existence and location of cameras across the street from an embassy are not the puzzle-pieces that troop movements are. Indeed, we must be cautious with inadvertant comments from troops to family and friends because tidbits of info can be peiced together and used against us. However, get real, the cameras across from this embassey are neither secret nor sensitive. Try working HUMINT and get out from your cubicle.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Jack Pensacola Florida — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:05:01 GMT

THANK YOU NBC For keeping TRUTH and INTEGRITY above all else... Government patriotic orgies and so called "americanism" should never be a reason to sweep the truth under the rug as so many of these sheeple have commented...in fact the opposite of their lament is true... DO report the bunglings , even when they are ours...let people rea;ize that a man is merely a man wehter he is Dr.M.D, or Senator, or President....CIA or FBI...some are idiots and some are intelligent.

Once we all see how we are in this together, well start thinking alike more...but never be afraid of the truth getting into the public. Oh,......and yes, they are THAT dumb when they get over confident, and also when they government they work for is wrong in so many ways.....morale declines as morals do.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Ben Dover, At Large, D.C. — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:02:29 GMT

I agree with John Doe in Seattle. Those shingles look pretty nasty, it doesn't help to have three Maroon government sedans parked in front of the house. As far as the "time line" of the pictures, it is not "late in the afternoon" as described, it is about 5 minutes until noon, at least the picture appears to have been taken recently given that the Crab Apple tree is just blooming.

As for not giving the address of the house, there has already been too much information given not to know where the house address is located, the editor should have picked up on this "oversight"

Embassy surveillance starts when the embassy is built, once all of the "bugs" have been worked out of the new construction, the Xerox service man chimes in.

The OP is simply the same as it ever was, YWM-MWY

Prost Comrades

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

R.A. Masury Ohio — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:12:00 GMT

This very story was eerily foretold back in 1981 by two very gifted prophets. Their prophecy was thus:

Private eyes
They're watching you.
They see your every move, baby,
Private eyes, they're watching you,
Private eyeeess,
They're watching you, watching you, watching yoooouuuuuu!!!

The prophets were, of course, Darryl Hall and John Oates. It's as if they wrote the article themselves, isn't it? All hail Hall and Oates! :)

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

cire2loki, redwood city, ca — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:30:23 GMT

People, you must be kidding! First, a safe house is a secret location used for conducting secret stuff, like debriefing a covert agent or interviewing a defector. It's not a place used for surveillance. That's a 'stake house.' :)

Second, of course the embassy knows it is under surveillance (In Moscow the US Embassy gets so many microwaves from across the street - a church called Our Lady of the Microwaves-, the joke is you can fry your eggs on the windowsill.)

Third, as pointed out, the FBI obviously wanted the foreign embassy to feel loved. Whether they have other undisclosed surveillance set up (obviously) or whether they are just doing a tit-for-tat for what that country does to our embassy there, or, most likely, are conducting some really complicated scenario, experts around the whole world acknowledge the FBI is one of the best if not the best security services in the world.

Bottom line: Oooh, we're being awful... Nope. Oooh, we're morons... Nope.

They might call the world's only superpower a 500 pound gorilla, but only morons call us morons, and only the evil call us evil.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Anonymous, Afghanistan — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:24:54 GMT

As a military operative I promise you that the FBI wasn't exactly trying to hide those cameras. Common sense should tell you that. If their agency, or the CIA, wants to be secretive while conducting surveillance then it would not be noticed by anyone. Their methods have been tried, tested, and improved for decades and always prove effective.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

John, Detroit, MI — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:40:00 GMT

"The only time we are actually informed about the spy technology our government uses is when it has been retired and newer technology has replaced it. We were told about the U-2 after it was replaced by the SR-71, and then informed about the SR-71 when it was replaced by newer stealth technology"

Ummm...The U-2 was kept secret for 7 years, from 1955 to 1962. The SR-71 (technically starting the the A-12) was kept secret for 2 years, from 1962 until 1964, then continued to operate, officially acknowledged, for another 37 years until 1999.

By this logic the government has managed to keep a functional replacement secret for 48 years since the revealing of the SR-71? A stealthy aircraft developed only 2 years after the SR-71 first flew, developed before the SR-71 actually entered functional service? Why wouldn't all those nifty features have been included in the SR-71 if they were so revolutionary to keep secret for half a decade? Your theory makes zero sense.

Do you also think that the F-22 and F-35 are elaborate decoys, spending massive amounts of R&D money in the public eye to disguise our super secret ray gun fighters which travel at the speed of light and were created in 1968? Please.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Matt — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 03:46:58 GMT

Call me ignorant for not bothering to read the rest of the comments. I'll just have my say like everyone else.

As far as not being a patriot or not caring about the country for running a story like this, absurd. I'm assuming the often illegal tactics our government uses now are quite more extensive. And if this house had any operational value, that's pretty sad.

Also, that agent should be in hot water. Along with the private companies that compile databases sometimes rivaling our own government, just to sell all this info. Anyone can get it, just pay some money.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

PJD, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 04:18:50 GMT

As far as I can see no address or names were posted. Just a story told about a couple of buildings somewhere in D.C.. Pretty much from what I can tell as the author states, all that was disbursed was info that had been previously screened by FBI and okayed pursuant to omissions of names and addresses. Without those details there is no treason, no unforgivable act comitted, just a humorous tale of typical loose ends left hanging for anyone to find. Just a look at the job listing and I'd bet that the application was filled in that way deliberately. If you give the impression of cameras and someone spying on your target, you can save a lot of man power and tax dollars just making them sweat. The FBI probably doesn'tt even have the things plugged in.

As for the disclosures of databases and the like, don't fool yourself into thinking the author is the only one who knows they exist.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Sam — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 05:50:25 GMT

LD McCoy wrote:

"Ya know? for the past few years, I've seen reports like this, and others detailing troop deployment to hot spots around the world, exposes of Cia houses, and FBI operations.. etc etc etc.."

Yeah! You're absolutely right L.D. I remember, it was that Geraldo guy on Fox. Gave away troop movements! And that other guy Cheney! and what's his name, Libby. They exposed the secret identity of a C.I.A. agent to that liberal media guy, Robert Novak! And he put it in the paper! And he doesn't think he did anything wrong! They should string these traitors up!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Robert Forum, Seattle, WA — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:18:09 GMT

It doesn't surprise me that you were able to do this. With the invention of the internet you essentially have access to all networked data provided you know where to look, and in some cases possess the right permissions or ability to bypass said permissions. In some cases of shoddy network security a search engine will give you legal backdoor access to information someone assumed to be protected.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Chris Frantz, Madison MS — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:22:54 GMT

"Didn't the FBI report to AG Alberto Gonzalez and now Michael Mukasey? Don't they report to W. Bush?

Regardless how good rank and file are, organizations are run top down and reflect the attributes of their bosses such as incompetence, arrogance, dishonesty, etc. Should we say more? if not for that your report and that of the Chicago Tribune would never have been possible.
George F. Valle, Miami, Florida (Thursday, March 27, 2008 3:29 PM)"

Note that the date listed is july 2000, I believe Clinton was still in president, so George I agree with your assessment about the people in charge.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

George Birch,Big Lake ,Mn. — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:46:48 GMT

The FBI has had some notable setbacks in recent years,what with moles and outright traitors in their midst.Still,the job they do needs to be done.But this should be a warning of how all the agencies have deteriorated in the last few years.FEMA no longer is effective nor is the FDA,FTC,and FEC.Incompetence and cronyism rots from the top down.As for the so called liberal media,where were they the last eight years as our infrastructure crumbles under the weight of unconstitutional excesses.Show me your papers,it's OK to torture,preemptive wars.As far as the media is concerned it's all business as usual.Their silence in the face of obvious crimes against the constitution and standing law is directly abetting a criminal administration.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

ed, washington dc — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:53:51 GMT

What, you live in a bubble? Welcome to the global village. Whatever the FBI is doing is the very same thing done by every government that hosts representatives of other governments. The difference is, we let the other governments tell us what we can monitor, whereas in Russia, they tell you what will be monitored and make sure its installed by their contractors during the construction of your building. Unlike here, where we let the foriegn governments control our contractors!!! NBC should be ashamed to have done this story. Ask your fellow 'journalists' in the liberal minded countries which they champion, what would happen if THIS story has occurred in Russia, France, any African country, South America, Cuba or any other place where they shoot traitors merely upon suspicion.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Tony Washington, DC area — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 16:14:44 GMT

Hmm, to some responders here, who's to say that the DEA doesn't use the same tactic on major drug dealers?

I agree that the article shows public information. If this was considered sensitive, then the FBI should have it removed right now. Or properly set it up as a dummy corp. Why isn't someone fixing this? Why is this info still there? I imagine you could find the same data under FOIA.

I also agree that our embassies are watched just as much as the ones over here. In addition to our locations in DC being watched (i.e. years ago when a spy was caught parked outside Dept of State so he could be within transmitting range of a bug planted inside).

I, however will try to avoid be pictured near these potential embassies and not get caught in some investigation.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Paul — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 17:02:43 GMT

Although this seems too obvious a bungle, I wonder if it is. What disturbs me most is, assuming you are in fact a patriotic U.S. citizen, I would expect you to quietly report such a bungle to the FBI and expect a correction to it. No correction, then you follow up again quietly. If still no correction, then there's your "story". However, if corrected no "story". My suspecions are you really couldn't care less. Why because you're a "journalist" who's only motivation is the "scoop" at any expense. And this is why I dispise "journalists."

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Jon Doe, Washington DC — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 17:22:01 GMT

Kudo's to NBC someone needs to keep an eye on government, after all what happens when they assume control, in many way the terrorists got waht they wanted after 9-11 which is to end the free society which american was built upon and is threatened every day with more litigation and stipulations as well as freedoms being taken away. It is imperative that FREE SPEECH remain available to us all no matter how obscene or traitorous it seems, other wise we might well have a society like China's before long.....

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Really a Citizen, Daytona Beach, FL — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 17:40:29 GMT

Re: "you don't give away American secerets." I believe you meant to say, "You don't give away Russian secrets," right? What exactly is to keep American government (including its more clandestine arms) doing their job right if it weren't for the press? If you want to see how government works when there isn't media sniffing around writing every single report they can glean on what the government is doing, check out how well the U.S.S.R. worked.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Mark, Sacramento, Ca. — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 17:46:43 GMT

A decade or so ago I had regular visits to a foreign consulate in San Francisco for business. It was the inside joke with the government and private visitors alike to smile and wave when you left the building so the FBI could get a nice picture of you. My wife and I were taken back to our hotel in a consulate car one night after a social event there. The boys in black followed us and we all exchanged waves when they got close to us. Everybody involved on both sides knows the game and has fun with it. Its no big deal. We did the same thing to the KGB when I was in the old USSR working. The KGB has to have half a dozen pics of me smiling,and giving them the bird.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Question and Answer — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 17:50:54 GMT

What's wrong with Americans on both sides today? Liberals and Republicans tend to see the other side as traitors or ignorant, but it is fact that we all love our country. We simply have different views on what is important. Some think that release of this story is a benefit to our country, while others believe that it's release is a threat to our country. To all I just have this to say.
Our country is founded on the basic and most important freedom that its people should be in charge of the government, not the government in charge of the people. If there are wrongs or errors produced by the government it is the duty of its people to inform and enforce changes. The real traitors of America are the ones that would protect our government over all else. So remember that whether you are rep. or dem. protection of our people is patriotism!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

geral sosbee — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 18:35:46 GMT

As people discover the immoral, cowardly and macabre character of the agents, operatives, handlers and associates of the fbi/cia (as manifest globally in the killing/torture techniques used by these sociopathic assassins to insure compliance to new world order dictates) we may not reasonably expect a merciful redress from foreign and domestic freedom fighters forced from desperation to employ against US equally aggressive and abhorrent stratagems. Geral Sosb

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Frank Du'Locke, Mich. — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 19:13:13 GMT

It's laughable how, even after all these years, the FBI is yet to clean up its act. With any luck, actually airing these fatal flaws will shame them into cleaning up their act, as pointing them out to higher-ups in low-key fashion (as the author did) has clearly done nothing.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

RK — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 19:50:00 GMT

A non-story by a reporter who must really be bored. Read any book about this stuff (like Kessler's) and you would know it is just a normal part of the diplomatic world here and abroad. As dumb as it sounds, there are even dumber people like Aldrich Ames who are aware of such activities, that walk in to an embassy looking to sell out their country.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Daniel, Regina Saskatchewan — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 20:43:42 GMT

Having embassasies under serveilance is a no-brainer. I think a real scandal would be them NOT having cameras watching foriegn embassasies. They have open, non-hidden cameras on major intersections to stop people from going through red lights. I think having the cameras sort of but not really hidden is just an aesthetic thing, to avoid making embassy row look cheap.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

John Doe, Seattle, Wash — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 01:16:38 GMT

They expose the obiviuos so they can hide the truth about everything not just spying. The concept will always work in all matters.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

edwardville Il — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 03:08:01 GMT

Safe houses are not used for surveillance. I think the former cold war enemy embassy probably got the joke. I would think any cold war enemy with an embassy in our country would know they were being watch. Just as our embassies in thier countries were. I think there were US embassies that were torn down because they were so full of the other sides spy gear. I do not think were worry much about some cold war enemies many of the russian KGB people applied for citizenship in the 1990's. I think we let them in and our governement found them so uneventful we stopped following them.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

JW Owego, NY — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 03:10:40 GMT

Maybe the inhabitants of the embassy have been harrassed or threatened and the FBI installed the cameras for their protection. And in any embassy, in any part of the world, the occupants assume they are under observation anyway. It's not like they are going to conduct some big secret swapping deal on their front steps.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

John Doe Someplace, Somewhere — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:49:34 GMT

This is sad. We all speak--er, type--of real patriotism and standing by your country, and yet, our country is just as much full of fault as any other. I mean, who ended up putting Saddam in power in the Middle East? We...the Americans, did. Who joined with Russia during World War II, only to fight against them in the Cold War? We...the Americans, did. And so, now who is monitoring its own people because people are so concerned with terrorism to the point that it's almost pathethically laughable? Once again...we Americans! In short, if the FBI is going to spy on its own people, it will, and there's isn't a thing we--the regular populous--can do about it, because we are not the ones holding the positions of power.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Cole, Des Moines, IA — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 17:09:33 GMT

Who wrote the title for this article? A safehouse is a place where you keep people who need protecting (i.e. Witness Protection Program) not surveilance cameras. And I'm sure the embassy knows that we have cameras watching them. Just because you can see the cameras makes this "safehouse" not-so-safe? its like the cameras in Wal-Mart, you see them so you dont steal, they are supposed to see the cameras and not do anything theyre not supposed to

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

White — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 23:00:08 GMT

I love how people are accosting NBC for being good reporters and doing their job. Their job is to point out idiotic flaws like this to everyone, so that they dont happen anymore. The actual location of the house, what embassy it was near, who the agent was; were all kept a secret. So how exactly are they 'giving secret information to the TERRORISTS'. What they are doing is showing the world that the FBI has consistently made massive mistakes in the past decade, specific mistakes like this one, which have led to thousands of American lives being lost. The FBI and CIA have failed America, and while I am sure numerous people who work for these organisations are deserving of our respect and are truly heroic Americans, the organisations as a whole have let us all down. You then blame NBC for the complete incompetence of these intelligence agencies ?
Let's recap; you knew Osama was going to attack us but did nothing, you spent Billions trying to find him but didnt, you bankrupted this country with a wild goosehunt for weapons of mass destruction, and now you cant even hide a camera.
I realise modern intelligence gathering is massively complex and difficult, but a track record like this for a multibillion dollar organisation is just astonishing and I'm glad NBC came to point it out.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Stephen Christides, Memphis, TN — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 23:10:24 GMT

maybe it's correct and the FBI made a boo-boo...maybe they did this for a reason we're not aware of...let's not jump to conclusions based on limited info, which is what this article is! Very interesting topic, let's hope the FBI isn't this accident-prone!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

luis villa pflugerville, tx — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 23:33:44 GMT

That is why Fidel Castro is still alive....they are not good of what they do. They can only catch a criminal if they personally surrender.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Jay, the O. C,, \ca — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 01:32:34 GMT

How are we going to make informed decisions about who should represent us if idiocy is always covered up? The real traitors are those who think evidence of government incompetence should be kept secret from the people in the name of national security.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Steve Lueck, Bisbee, AZ — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 03:18:09 GMT

Interesting the expectations people have of government. The statement that organizations are run from the top down is ludicrous. I have been in gov. for 20 yrs. now and I can tell you that any turf-building mid-level yahoo can totally screw up the best intentions of the man or woman at the top and never have to pay for it. Thanks to Civil Service security, the guilty can almost never be punished, or even held accountable. (You can run over a security guard, be fired, be reinstated and receive back pay, and this is just one example.) Why should anyone think that in a place where cowardice and stupidity are everywhere that any branch of government should be exempt? When lawyers become honest men, we all might have a chance.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Aerin, California — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 04:01:53 GMT

John Doe, Virginia (Friday, March 28, 2008 6:52 AM)

I find it hard to believe that you have a clearance at all and if you do probably one not higher than secret. I too can throw buzz words around to try to make myself more crediable. "Loose lips sink ships" huh? You have been looking at those scif posters too long.

I am more disgusted by the "unamerican" "unpatrotic" labels that are being given to this reporter than what he supposedly is being accused of. I wish I had seen this kind of outrage by the far-right-wingers about the Plume outing. I love the double standards.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Captian Obvious, Somewhere, Iraq — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 05:08:35 GMT

We also watch them for their security. We are responsible for their security safety here, in our country.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Em — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:13:03 GMT

I disagree with the media posting things like this on the internet and or wherever. Can't we just let the FBI do their job and leave them alone. Why are we constantly trying to start things with people? Especially the FBI, which is supposed to be top secret things, might I add. Don't you have anything better to report about as a reporter? I'm sure there are pleanty of interesting things going on out there for you to write about. I would support the FBI greatly if they started pressing charges against reporters for investigating these type of things. This is aboslute obsurd.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Steve Who, Philadelphia, PA — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 13:16:41 GMT

The FBI's counter intellegence is respected as among the best in the world. That's why other governments request it's help and training all the time.

So what did you really see? What was the real message that was being sent by the obvious cameras?

Maybe they were just looking to see who the first person to report the cameras would be?

Do you really know?

The real problem is the need of a larger fiscal budget and new recriuts of the best and most trainable not just the brightest.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Suspicious — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 13:34:41 GMT

Anyone consider this as a decoy? Put cameras up that are noticeable in one area. Whoever is in the building would obviously know about them. So, they don't do anything in view of theose cameras. This reduces the area in which things can be done. My guess cameras are decoys just to keep other cameras from being detected.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

strawstack8@msn.com — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 13:51:46 GMT

I agree with the majority of respondants. I find it interesting to hear the people that want to keep their heads buried and not pay attention to what is happening around them. I believe there should always be civilian oversite of the activities of government. As pointed out, the cameras were visible from the street so there isn't any breach of security. This points out how such information is available to criminals and why there is such a rise in idenity theft. It isn't just Big Brother is watching but so are many criminals trying to steal your lively hood.
Jeff S, Magna, UT

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Legal Eagle, Dallas, Texas — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:09:39 GMT

What a joke. I am absolutely sure the FBI would list someone as "Clerk, but I'm really an FBI agent-- please shoot me!" C'mon.

The FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) has plainclothes security agents with guns on most airline flights and you expect me to believe the FBI would make secret information and leave it someplace my 14-year old could find it.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to "dig up" misleading information on the 'Net.

The same folks who take satellite images from space of whatever they need to are going to leave chunky obvious cameras behind skylights. Uh-huh.

Of course embassies are the subject of security monitoring (I agree with cire2loki)--as are airports and other high-traffic, internationally-accessible areas. A little common sense should tell you that.

Thanks for alerting all of the paranoid conspiracy theorists that it's not safe to emerge from their underground bunkers yet. Bravo.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

B. Me, Washington D.C. — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 20:10:04 GMT

Congratulations Jim Popkin Senior Investigative Producer. I believe your title should be updated to "Really A Spy." Really, I'm sure you contacted the FBI prior to publishing this and I'm just as sure they probably requested that you didn't. You should continue your "investigative reporting" and continue to publish information beneficial to U.S. advesaries. You should really be proud of yourself. Really.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Delta Trooper, Fayetteville NC — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:34:00 GMT

I guess this is the reason why the Chinese, Iranians think the US is easy pickings. Wat they don't know is how many "safe houses" and groups that are working to bring about the downfall of the Iranian theocracy. We will be at war with them soon, but right now we have to hand off combat ops to the gutless Iraqis. They have good, motivated Spec. Ops groups, but the IA is littered with Mahdi spies, and the IP are the most corrupt police this side of Hong Kong. We are gonna hammer those Persian psychophants, its just gonna take time.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Delta Trooper, Fayetteville NC — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:37:00 GMT

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

"G", Dixon, Missouri — Fri, 02 May 2008 00:31:23 GMT

I am really, really amazed at the posts! Some of them with the poorest of grammar and punctuation, I cringe when I read them. We are solely responsible for our own government, our elected officials. Then we have the nutz to talk crap about them?!? Get real people, know what you are talking about, know what you want to say, and most of all know how to say it. I gave this country 20+ years of my service and don't regret a second of it, because I love this place. Thank you for letting me voice my opinion!

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

l. jenkins, red oak, Ia — Thu, 08 May 2008 03:02:14 GMT

This article was quite funny. However some of the comments have been rather alarmin. Exposing the misdeeds of the government IS THE JOB of the press, liberal or not. If spies from other countries have not been intellegent enough to figure these things out then we would not need so much funding to combat them. I understand the underlying patriotism, but not the reasoning behind the critizism of the press for doing their job.

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Skysoldier Ft. Campbell Ky — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 16:13:04 GMT

The FBI and other intel agencies best take a look at thier operatives in the field. Too much Joe College and not enough street smart people. It would be nice if the CIA went back to the "old ways" maybe then it would be respected-and feared.