The CIA in present international politics

wolf, First things first; WELCOME to A2K. Now to your subject. Some political pundits during the past several weeks have said that the CIA has outgrown its usefulness, and they suggest we follow the UK pattern after their G5. I also think the FBI has outgrown its usefulness, and we need to consolidate many of these "homeland security" type of institutions created when this world was different. The latest attempts at a Homeland Security organization is not going to be effective, because they're trying to consolidate old and formed habits into new ones. It just will not work. At this point, "intelligence" is an oxymoron. If anybody tries to consolidate five different huge organizations with their own organizational structure into one, you're going to get confusion and chaos - not organization and efficiency. They had to start from square one and build up; not the other way around. Another government boondoggle. c.i.

Howdy, wolf, and Welcome to A2k. Lemme know if there's anything I can do to help you settle in. I know where the furniture is, and how most of the other stuff works

Interesting disdcussion topic, thanks. I look forward to seeing how it develops ... and promise to stir things up a bit as the pot starts filling.



timber

"Hello, is this the FBI?"
"Yes, What do you want?"
"I'm calling to report about my neighbor Billy Bob Smith! He is
hiding marijuana inside his firewood."
"Thank you very much for the call, sir."
The next day, the FBI agents descend on Billy Bob's house.
They search the shed where the firewood is kept. Using axes, they
bust open every piece of wood, but find no marijuana.
They swore at Billy Bob and left.
The phone rings at Billy Bob's house.
"Hey, Billy Bob! Did the FBI come?"
"Yeah!"
"Did they chop your firewood?"
"Yep."
"Happy Birthday, Buddy!"

CI, you've done it again. We may always need a super organization to protect us, but, I also believe they should create it from scratch - then have CIA and FBI and the like apply for their jobs so that they are aware it is not just more of the same old thing.

I concur with the opinion that the CIA has outlived its usefulness.

As a ground rule, you could say that anything pertaining to need secrecy only favors a certain elite.

If you believe we no longer need an intelligence gathering agency, does that mean you believe that no one means us harm, or does it mean you think we have no interest in knowing whether others mean us harm?

tres, None of us have said "we no longer need an intelligence gathering agency." It will require greater intelligence to fight the war on terrorism. What we are saying is that the CIA has outlived its usefulness, and needs to be consolidated into a new organization that is more universal. Just trying to mesh all the different departments of the government into one will not work. The organizational chart of the old departments must be destroyed totally, and the new organization must have its own. The expertise of the old CIA and FBI can be utilized in this new organization, but they must all apply for their jobs like everybody else. They will then know and understand the chain of command, and eliminate the old processes that minimized its effectiveness. c.i.

ci - I took this:


...to be a blanket call for doing away with intelligence gathering services. Perhaps I read it wrong, but that is how it reads to me.

Wolf? Can you clarify your position here? Thanks.

- TW

tres, Ooops, missed that one! However, as a participant in this discussion, I read your post as a 'blanket' statement of fact. c.i.

Are you arguing that the CIA alone should be abolished, or are you saying that the United States should have no Intelligence Service at all? The Company has had to endure a lot of bad press, and some of it is deserved. Unfortunately, only operational failures are ever publicized. Many of the CIA's successes aren't widely known even within the Intelligence Community.

There are basic and fundamental rules are common to all intelligence organizations. Above all, information is priceless. Never, ever reveal to the world what you know, or the sources and means used in acquiring data. Data is collected from many sources (open, electronic signatures, signals, photographs, and human assets). Data may be interesting, but it isn't information until it is confirmed by multiple sources and has been carefully been analyzed by highly trained specialists.

Open sources are often the richest, especially when taken from free societies with few restraints on what is published. Open sources from places like Iraq and North Korea, are a drop in the bucket to what is available in any popular American magazine, newspaper, or broadcast. Signal and photo sources are extremely useful and U.S. Intelligence has come to put too great a reliance on these sources. Human intelligence is arguably the best source of intelligence. Human intelligence comes from having multiple sources within the policy-making circles of the target. That means dealing with spies, traitors to their own regimes, and opportunists seeking personal gain. It means bribery, blackmail, and other forms of behavior not normally acceptable to polite society. Most spies do not betray their trust out of idealism, but rather from selfish motivations. Distaste and idealistic notions have caused past American Presidents, Congress, and the American People to virtually order our Intelligence Community not to use human intelligence assets.

The CIA was designed to bring all intelligence data together and to process it into usable information to guide our national policy makers, most specifically the NCA. The CIA has also long been charged with conducting covert operations outside the Unites States in support of allies, or against enemies of the United States. In recent years, the CIA has become virtually incapable of mounting effective large-scale covert operations. The Intelligence Community is made up of more organizations than is publicly known, and each has a specific role to play in our overall effort to gather data and process it into useful information.

To abolish the CIA would not in itself take the United States out of the intelligence game, but it would seriously cripple our efforts to protect the nation. Without the CIA, a greater burden would fall on the rest of the Intelligence Community, and some areas might not be covered at all.

Oh the whole, I believe that you are arguing that the United States should have no Intelligence Community at all. That would be the result of forcing Intelligence to have no secrets from the public. What would we reasonably expect if there was no Intelligence Community? The simple answer is that we would be blind in a world where our enemies would have full vision. Imagine a well-armed blind giant pitted against a score of pygmies armed with daggers and determined to kill the giant. The two sides are in a china shoppe, and the giant is not permitted to break even a teacup, but pygmies have no such restraint. Is that a scenario that you want to bring about? Even with the faulty vision caused by the collapse of our human intelligence networks, we will find it difficult to completely subdue and defeat those who wish to destroy us.

BLANKET STATEMENT OF FACT: I am cold, and I need a blanket. :wink:

I like the polite tone of this forum, I hope we can keep it that way.

Because I'm one of many who believe that the world would be much better off without the CIA. Every despotic regime in the post-WWII world has been created by the CIA, and every terror group has been funded and trained by it. From the Sjah of Iran to the Ba'ath party - the CIA was more or less secretly behind it.

I'm also firmly convinced that the CIA not only had foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks, but was (probably with Israeli help) a major force behind it, or at least certain cells of it. I'm willing to admit that there are true patriots in the CIA, and that the agency even has some honest, decent people on their payroll, who don't even know what's going on in other departments, but the core and the hierarchy of the CIA are pure gangsters... There's no better word.

So, it's my firm conviction - a conviction based on facts - that our worst enemies are not extreme Islamists, but extreme CIA. The US probably does need a good intelligence agency, but the CIA "needs to be scrubbed from the top to the bottom" (admiral Jeremiah)

For those who think the CIA is a regular state-serving i.a.:
http://lightscion.com/CIA.htm

"Intelligence" is a tricky critter. In a changing, ever-more-closely-interconnected world, its urgent necessity increases exponentially. What is called for is a reassessment of the entire existing "Intelligence" structure, and I believe that is being addressed, while I offer no assessment of how successfully or in what manner it is being addressed.

There will always be "Hidden Agendas", "Nefarious Plots", and "Iniquitous Intentions". Vigilance and due dilligence require we employ all means available to remain apprised of the undercurrents of diplomacy. To do other would be criminally irresponsible, disingenuous in the extreme, and insupportably dangerous.

As to "Revealing Sources": During WWII, technical means enabled Allied Warplanners to become aware of German intent to bomb Coventry well enough in advance of the event to have established effective defense. To preserve and employ the greater overall benefit of Allied Code-Breaking abilities, it was regretfully and reluctantly decided to allow the raid to occur. Coventry suffered some, but was not obliterated by any means. Continued successful code intercepts allowed the frustration of German Submarine Wolfpack attacks on Cross-Atlantic Convoys to continue and to in fact greatly diminish the threat therefrom. Much of the success of The Normandy Landing may be laid to Allied awareness of German coded communications.

Intelligence is a dirty, nasty business. It calls for hard choices and pragmatic decisions. Revealing intelligence may well not only endanger the source whereby that intelligence was gained, but negate the benefit derived therefrom.

Our Intelligence Apparatus is in need of streamlining and enhanced efficiency. The multiplicity of agencies is counterproductive and decidedly not cost-effective. We do not need "Less Intelligence"; rather we need, and are striving to effect, greater and more responsive, pro-active intelligence. Spys and spooks may not be nice, but in a world of real situations, their need is undeniable.



timber

From Time feb 3 ,issue
The CIA's Secret army


http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101030203/story.html


http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101030203/wtenet.html

Awkward how Time develops a selective memory - what about the CIA's involvement in the Kennedy assassination and in 9/11? Those are NOT conspiracy theories to me, nor should they be to any sincere person.

What about the ties between bin Laden, Pakistani ISS, and the CIA?

Has there ever been a serious discussion on the CIA's 9/11-preknowledge on this forum? I know it makes people go but the history books deserve better than the official lies.

Others remain sincerely unconvinced. Are they less valid persons for that?

"Intelligence" is an integral component of war, which is the nastiest, most reprehensible, pervasive, insidious business there is. Moral and ethical outrage are not to be unexpected. While such should never be forgiven, in real life, such are given.

Absent documented, verifiable, relevant evidence to the contrary, allegations, assumptions, and assertions, however vigorous, do not support a position. The dispassionate, objective, critical consideration of sworn testimony, documentation with reliable provenance, and such physical evidence as may exist and may be submitted does support positions. If that is "Official Lies", that's really a shame, because, believe me partner, that's all we got right now.



timber

The abortive assasination attempt in 1985 of Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, Lebanese Shiite leader (80 people killed in the attempt) seems to have been forgotten -- it lead to the policy of not attemtping to kill world leaders but it seems it was a little too late.

Wolf,

Trot out your evidence. Not heresay, not the opinions nor speculation from the fringe. Evidence. That which you seem to believe is fact sounds much more like the fevered imagination of someone without a clue as to the Land of Shadows.

CIA involvement in JFK assassination. Why not blame the Company for the assassination of Lincoln and McKinnely while you're at it? The CIA and Mosad engineered 911. Sounds like an update of the old FDR plan to get the US into WWII by staging the attack on Pearl. Why would any serious person believe either of these fantastic charges?

The ISI was, and is still a supporter of radical Islamic movements throughout Southwest Asia. The Pakistani government has supported and helped make possible removal of the Taliban and Al Queda from Afghanistan. Both the ISI and the Pakistani government have recieved assistance from the United States in return for their cooperation and assistance. That assistance has taken many forms, and the CIA may indeed have provided some of it. Neither the CIA, nor the United States in general have any effective control over the policies and practices of either Pakistan, or the ISI. Those are the facts. Where's the beef?

The CIA provided some assistance to the Freedom Fighters of Afghanistan during their struggle with the USSR. Bin Ladin also participated in that struggle, and he provided money and supplies out of his own pocket. That is the extent of a CIA/Al Queda connection. Bin Ladin and his Al Queda network has increasingly conducted violent terrorist acts against the United States and the West since.

The Company has some very big problems, but they are not involved in any way with operations directed against our People. The Company has become too much of a timid bureaucracy unwilling to get out from behind desks at the Farm. Human intelligence was curtailed because the President, Congress and folks just like you demanded it. The Company was in a position to assist the Kurds and an internal effort to replace Saddam, but they didn't have the nerve to follow through. People died as a result. Spies and Case Officers who operate from the shadows have been replaced by kids with nifty degrees and powerful ambitions to rise in the bureaucracy. That has to change, and I believe it is changing somewhat.

I would be obliged to do so if you give me a list of the administrations's evidence that L.H. Oswald killed JFK and that bin Laden was behind 9/11. Not the government's sworn statements, but evidence please. Shouldn't be so hard as it seems to be the accepted truth. I'm asking you seazoned forumers politely: enlighten my young mind with the facts.