It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NEWS: Mystery Spy Program

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 11:56 PM
An intelligence spending bill will be accompanying the newly passed intelligence overhaul legislation to President George W. Bush for signing. The seperate bill includes plans for a highly secretive project which many experts in the intelligence community believe is a new system to revamp aging spy satellites with high-tech defense procedures and better information gathering capabilities. The project is in a public cloud of mystery at the moment because of its classified nature, high expenditures (in Billions of $), and Democrat outcries of being unnecessary and potentially harmful to national security.
Congress' new blueprint for U.S. intelligence spending includes a mysterious and expensive spy program that drew extraordinary criticism from leading Democrats, with one saying the highly classified project is a threat to national security.

In an unusual rebuke, Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the senior Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, complained Wednesday that the spy project was "totally unjustified and very, very wasteful and dangerous to the national security." He called the program "stunningly expensive."

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Over many years, the legislation of the United States has been passing many secretive and classified bills for high-tech projects. I do not remember any of the bills being publically criticized as being a threat to national security. Without being able to gather information about the project through reading the actual legislation, the civilian is left to wonder exactly how he/she may be in danger as a result of the project.

In the article, some of the experts cited the potential for an arms race in space and vast foreign disapproval of the system. An arms race in space should frighten any citizen of the world due to the potential for catastrophic errors in transportation or use, or even the creation of unnecessary hostilities between countries. The foreign disapproval could create new barriers between countries that may be friendly or hostile towards the United States.

All and all, this article raises the interesting question of how much should the citizens allow their government to keep them in the dark when elected officials are citing concerns of wasted tax money and threats to their national security.

posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 04:31 PM
Well it appears to me that Pres. Bush has taken the high road with his"The sky is the limit" attitude with the taxpayers money. Im sorry, I forgot he was still Commander In Chief. Does this fact allow him to keep you and me in the 'bloomin dark especially when his actions and ideals may provoke an already skiddish international landscape? I often wonder where we sheeple fit in the grande scheme of things. I have to say the only reason I stand behind Bush is because I am an American Vet. But I think the bigger question is when are we who are footing the bill for everything going to say "Stop sending our money overseas because we need to take care of our own!" I truley think we would not have the level of homelessness, unemployment, and millions without insurance if we used it here more often. I just guess I'll never get a straight answer from anyone in D.C. or let alone from any of my states reps.

posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 09:13 AM
There're some more unclassified details in a story at the New York Times "Debate on Secret Program Bursts Into Open" 12/10/04, by Douglas Jehl (c. 2004 New York Times Company).

I do not have an URL, since I read a reprint from my company's NewsClips service, on our Intranet but not available to people outside the firewall.

I can understand Invent's concern about the spending of our money on a major classified procurement; however, my own worries are not necessarily that they are spending money on something I know nothing about (since Ii have elected people whom I know will run secret programs) but that the continuing reliance on high-tech sensor toys is not the best way to allocate our money for intelligence.

I'd much rather see more money spent on "HUMINT" (human intelligence), something which we've abandoned over the past 20 years in favor of more satellite and other high-tech resources.

The problem with these resources is that, based on our past history, they don't seem to work.


log in