The article gives its sources, and I can go to Linkedin myself to verify its veracity.
You're making an argument from authority that I should ignore the source since some authority said to - incidentally a source discussing how "former" CIA employees are working to censor what information I can see.
> The article gives its sources, and I can go to Linkedin myself to verify its veracity.
So? If they're willing to publish false or fabricated information to push their conspiracy theories, they're almost certainly willing to do other misleading things to push it too -- like making a mountain out of a molehill or giving some mundane fact a sinister spin.
You missed my point: something can present accurate facts in a highly misleading way.
People who've worked for the government get jobs outside of government, usually in similar areas. There's nothing sinister about it, but articles like this want it to seem sinister.
And frankly, this is like 1/10th of a story. They found some profiles on LinkedIn, but so what? Have these people actually done anything unacceptable? MintPress doesn't know.
> Would it be ok if Facebook hired someone who was part of the Sinaloa Cartel?
The CIA (which I understand the bulk is actually writing analysis reports and stuff like that), the FBI, USAID, and the Marines are not drug cartels; and to conflate them is not reasonable.
You're making an argument from authority that I should ignore the source since some authority said to - incidentally a source discussing how "former" CIA employees are working to censor what information I can see.