decade as far as i can see in which could wanter intelligence has been take your pick, underfunded, undernoticed or even disrespected. i've never gotten around to researching this but my guess would be if you went back to 1950 and before, the resources expend in the united states on intelligence probably came close to matching what we spent on that other aspect of intelligence. certainly the original pie neers to what became n.s.a. thought their job was to protect code. it was a by product for them. and i think you can even find in the popular culture some reflections of that. if you look back to motion pictures in the 1940's and even the 1950's. counter intelligence agencies were the good guys. that's all you need to know. 10 years before they would have been played by ronald reagan which meant water saved a lot of scripts. then we know how the culture changed. over time the protagonist in motion pictures and novels were ss in point to be the good guys ferreting out spice or actually the agents of departments and institutions that were out to violate civil liberties. this cultural shift marked

. >> and what about the -- just sort of the mvp and russell wilson, the undernoticed lesser noticed quarterbackilson was phenomenal. we always look at the quarterbacks, russell wilson versus peyton manning, going in, nobody picks russell wilson but he had the better game. he was the better quarterback. he's had the best start statistically for a quarterback in the history of football. he's had more wins through two years than anyone else and super bowl title to go along with it. he's a nice as a guy as you're ever going to meet. if you're going to root for somebody in football, he's the guy you should root for. >> except for you, you're my other nice guy. >> thank you. >> thank you for being with us. if you felt the tug on heart strings during the super bowl last night, you were probably watching this commercial from anheuser-busch, perfectly titled perfectly love. not only was it an online hit with 25 million hits on youtube before the broadcast debut, it also won first place in usa today's ad meter contest judged by thousands of consumers. who will argue with them? we can't wait to see what t

6th decade as far as can i see in which counter intelligence been take your pick, under funded, undernoticed or disrespected. i never gotten around to researching this. to 1950 and ack before, the resources expended probably ted states came pretty close to matching hat we spoepbt on that other aspect of intelligence. pioneers the original o it became n.s.a. thought their first job was protecting codes and ciphers. think you can even find in the popular culture some reflections of that. you look back to motion '40s and early '50s counter intelligent the good guys. how i did know that? they were always played by john jimmy stewart. that's all you need to know. ten years before they would have been played by ronald reagan or which means going after common nists which means that warner skaeuf saved a lot scripts. over time through the '70s and protagonistsnd the in motion pictures were less to guys fair garretting rogues.s than of course al shift marked more than counter intelligence and whether one warren t with the commission or war in vietnam from the 1960s the counter view that intelligence

decade as far as i can see in which counterintelligence has been take your pick, underfunded, undernoticed or even disrespected. i've never gotten around to researching this but my guess would be if you went back to 1950 and before, the resources expend in the united states on intelligence probably came close to matching what we spent on that other aspect of intelligence. certainly the original pioneers to what became n.s.a. thought their job was to protect code. it was a by product for them. and i think you can even find in the popular culture some reflections of that. if you look back to motion pictures in the 1940's and even the 1950's. counter intelligence agencies were the good guys. that's all you need to know. 10 years before they would have been played by ronald reagan which meant water saved a lot of scripts. then we know how the culture changed. over time the protagonist in motion pictures and novels were less in point to be the good guys ferreting out spice or actually the agents of departments and institutions that were out to violate civil liberties. this cultural shift marked

decade as far as i can see in which counterintelligence has been take your pick, underfunded, undernoticed or even disrespected. i never got around to researching this but my guess would be if you go back to 1950 and before the resources expended in the united states on counterintelligence probably came close to matching what we spend on the other aspect of intelligence. certainly the original pioneers to what became nsa got their first job was protecting american codes and ciphers. was something of a byproduct for them. you could even find in popular culture some reflections of fact. if you look back to motion pictures in the 40s and >> caller:s counterintelligence agencies, military or civilian were the good guys, how do i know that? they were always played by john wayne or jimmy stewart. that is all you need to know? can use the 4 they would have been played by ronald reagan and george murphy which meant going after not these versus communists which meant warner's save the law conscript. we know the culture change. over time in 70s and 80s and beyond the protagonists in motion pictures