Pentagon plans spy agency to rival CIA

Obviously I am not exactly sure where to post this.. Mods can move it if need be.

"""WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Pentagon will send hundreds of additional spies overseas as part of an ambitious plan to assemble an espionage network that rivals the CIA in size, U.S. officials said."""


www.star-telegram.com...

This second source has a better description of the program.

www.washingtonpost.com... tml


I was just shocked when I read this. I had not heard a single whisper of this. At a time when there is a serious money flow issue for the Government this just seems so odd. Basically if I understand this you will have two agencies from the Government doing almost the same thing. They will be competing against each other. In my opinion it will make both the agencies less effective in the long run. Why not just take lets say 3/4 of the cost of doing this vast operation and just spend the money making the CIA more effective. Something about this just so does not make any sense whatsoever.

It's a nice way of sticking out the proverbial tongue to so called 'enemies' of the state.




Either that, or it has something to do with money.



Maybe it's both.

reply to post by GArnold


The DIA has been around for a long time. They've just recently realized the advantage to having them around, and not having to rely on the CIA, which is going to scrub and hide information that they might need.

reply to post by GArnold

I was just shocked when I read this.

Shocked? Please...............This is quite possibly a response to the Benghazi incident. The military is merely re-establishing their position vis a vis civilian control over their overall resources, particularly in the area of 'intelligence.'

Money as an issue? We mustn't be so naive as to think that there is such a thing. Proof? The debt!

Dollars and cents "money" is for little grunts like you and I - its the medium of exchange for slaves. Some call it street money, which will soon be reduced to barter only.

We have a gargantuan, oversized government with competing agencies and agendas. The right hand doesn;t know what the left is doing. There has been an increased use of technology for intelligence gathering which supposedly allowed for 9/11 to happen as they missed major clues because of it.
Human intelligence (Humint) can often learn things found no other way. It's a sensible idea only it sounds like one more major expense coming at a time when we're facing budget shortfalls.
We probably have over a dozen different intelligence agencies all told working internationally.

here ya go:

Office of the Director of National Intelligence Independent Agencies
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
United States Department of Defense
Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Agency (AF ISR)
Air Force Office of Special Investigations
Army Counterintelligence
Army Criminal Investigation Command (Army CID)
Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)
Marine Corps Intelligence Activity [4]
Intelligence and Security Command (United States Army)[5]
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA)
National Reconnaissance Office (NRO)
National Security Agency (NSA)
Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS)
Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI)

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Asktheanimals


Amen to that, my friend, I was thinking the same thing, I guess the elite government behind the government wants now a personal agency for their own power as the ones we have now can not be trusted

Darn, my husband just made a comment about this new story, he said to me that the reason the pentagon wants another new agency is to spy on the other agencies because they are not longer trustworthy, I guess the spies need to spy on each other

considering that the CIA no longer 'owns' the intelligence which made it the premiere spy agency, which seems obvious to me given the resignation of David Patreaus, it makes sense that an entirely new agency would have to be created that owes nothing to the CIA...

it appears that the CIA is just an ordinary government agency now...the intelligence it possesses is useless for providing the guidance policy makers need to do their jobs.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
There has been an increased use of technology for intelligence gathering which supposedly allowed for 9/11 to happen as they missed major clues because of it.

Are you saying (implying) that 9/11 was a successful Al-Qaeda terrorist operation because of confusion on the part of various American intelligence agencies? If so, then are we to assume that you hold to the 9/11 Commissions version of events, which proposes that the deed was accomplished by 19 Arabs w/boxcutters, etc., etc., etc?

Copy from duplicate post....
Seems like I read a thread on here a couple days ago about the POTUS issuing a statement that implied there were people plotting within the FG to "decapitate" the American Government. (I'll see if I can find it...) On a side note this is what I think provoked this the Patraeus incident demonstrated that the ABC are spying on our military personnel, seems the appropriate response would be to say ok our turn to spy on you..... We have seen the power that the CIA has wielded in the past through building profiles on high ranking officials. Basically they will be spying on each other counter intel on counter intel...lol

Originally posted by GArnold
I was just shocked when I read this. I had not heard a single whisper of this. At a time when there is a serious money flow issue for the Government this just seems so odd. Basically if I understand this you will have two agencies from the Government doing almost the same thing. They will be competing against each other. In my opinion it will make both the agencies less effective in the long run.

As far as I can tell, National HUMINT Manager authority is still delegated to the Director of the NCS, so there is no duplication of effort. CIA will continue to coordinate and deconflict HUMINT collection across the IC. DIA officers will probably continue to focus on DOD concerns like enemy strength, disposition, and capabilities, time sensitive targets, etc. CIA has more than enough work collecting everything else.

Why not just take lets say 3/4 of the cost of doing this vast operation and just spend the money making the CIA more effective.

Different agencies have different organizations, goals, and cultures. The CIA is not the DIA, and no matter how effective you make it, it will never be the DIA. Although the DIA is a member of the IC, it is subordinate to and responsive to the Pentagon. The CIA is an independent agency, and the Pentagon can't rely on it to be responsive to their needs. The DIA specializes in defense matters like OB analysis and targeting. The CIA is generalist, and has to address every national HUMINT requirement. The DIA has opportunities for official cover through defense attaches and other military and DOD civilians that the CIA does not.

The CIA and the military have had a good working relationship recently, but the CIA can really only handle a few priorities at a time, and all of those have been military/GWOT for ten years. They've tied up too many resources in finding and killing a handful of people in the Middle East, because those were the national priorities, but priorities change. To fulfill its charter, the CIA must remain general enough that it can change with them. What was once a university gone to war, before it slid down to a classified news agency after the Cold War, is devolving into a mere appendant military. This may be a step in reversing that trend, and hopefully restoring something of the Agency's original character.

And if you are concerned about the cost, you probably overlooked this:

Defense officials stressed that the DIA has not been given any new authorities or permission to expand its total payroll. Instead, the new spy slots will be created by cutting or converting other positions across the DIA workforce, which has doubled in the past decade — largely through absorption of other military intelligence entities — to about 16,500.

Vickers has given the DIA an infusion of about $100 million to kick-start the program, officials said, but the agency’s total budget is expected to remain stagnant or decline amid mounting financial pressures across the government.

3/4 of zero is zero, a number which will not significantly increase the effectiveness of the CIA.

It's like this: the Defense Department seems to have determined that the executive-branch only departments of the NSA and CIA no longer have the interests of national defense and security as priorities and are supplying intel strictly to the political masters for their "own bureaucratic priorities".

The Pentagon feels the need for more dedicated tactical and strategic information sources that supercede the whims and suspect priorities of the political panderers aka the civilian government. Whether or not the humint resources works for this agency or that, the management/analysis and use of that intel information becomes the "property" of various agengies and their in (politially appointed) house analytical teams to "put the spin" on the information for the consumption by their political masters and the eventual "leaking" which accompanites covert activity necessary to influence public opinion.

I am certain the military commanders in the field and in the headwuarteds require un-politicized analytical information from humint and other resources in order to make the correct, legal and constitutionally bound decisions necessary to reduce or eliminate credible threats to troops, operations and overall national security.

Unfortunately, there is no apolitical, unbiased information available from those agencies reporting to the Executive Branch which derive most of their funding through black budgets with little or no oversight on the activities, methods and political goals of the "powers that be" during any given 4-year political cycle. There is of course no guarantee tha additional intel resources owned by the Pentagon would provide any greater or more indepth information than existing resources - but there would by necessity be "another slant" on the intel more suited to strictly military and national security purposes rather than politically expedient purposes.

ganjoa

Seems like Hitler had a couple of agencies as well that didn't trust each other. The SA and the SS. IS that correct? Are there any comparisons the draw?

reply to post by davjan4

No, not really. As the OP's source article says, both agencies are onboard with this idea because it distributes the collection priorities to the agencies that actually want them and maintains the D/NCA's status as the National HUMINT Manager. Good try, though.

Originally posted by ParanoidAmerican
Seems like I read a thread on here a couple days ago about the POTUS issuing a statement that implied there were people plotting within the FG to "decapitate" the American Government. (I'll see if I can find it...)

Obama Moves Against Coup Plot:

U.S. President Barack Obama a memorandum last Wednesday that takes action against “insider threats,” which some analysts claim is really a move to stop a plot to ”decapitate” the government.

The memorandum, signed by President Obama on November 21 without any significant media coverage, provides “direction and guidance to promote the development of effective insider threat programs within departments and agencies to deter, detect, and mitigate actions by employees who may represent a threat to national security.

The National Insider Threat Policy looks to provide “the minimum elements necessary to establish effective insider threat programs,” which include “the capability to gather, integrate, and centrally analyze and respond to key threat-related information; monitor employee use of classified networks; provide the workforce with insider threat awareness training; and protect the civil liberties and privacy of all personnel.”

If we had any proper intelligence then we wouldnt have to guess whether Iran is building nuclear weapons and a dozen of other things we appear not to know.

Chew on this for awhile............... The Benghazi debacle is very deep - far deeper than anyone here realizes ! I think its safe to say that Benghazi has shaken the entire system to its very core - this includes CIA, NSA, and the military in general - not to mention the political upheaval caused throughout the executive branch etc.

EXCERPT

For those who are wondering about the real story behind the Patraeus affair, here is a completely different angle: General Petraeus has been and remains personal friends of Paula Broadwell and her husband for over 20 years.

Broadwell was trying to protect General Petraeus and Ambassador Stevens from an FBI Division 5 Israeli Mossad instigated email hacking attack against General Petraeus and Stevens as Petraeus and Stevens and other patriotic members of the U.S. military were compiling "smoking gun evidence" concerning the criminal money laundering activity of the Bush-Clinton-Cheney Crime Family Syndicate's Omega Fund.

Note: The Omega Fund has accrued massive profits from the illegal rigging of the LIBOR rate tied to Barclays Bank of England, UBS Switzerland and Citibank of New York." -- Tom Heneghan www.myspace.com...

EXCERPT

Tom Heneghan's blog references links to death of Ambassador Stevens (characterized as a targeted hit)...

As we have reported in previous intelligence briefings, Ambassador Stevens was in possession of the December of 2001 Osama bin Laden aka 9/11 patsy and CIA employee Tim Osman's death certificate.

Stevens also was in possession of financial records regarding the money laundry activities of the Bush-Clinton-Cheney Crime Family Syndicate administered Omega Fund, which was involved in launderingWanta-Reagan-Mitterrand Protocol Funds through nine (9) major U.S. banking institutions.

Again, it is important to remember that the night of the Benghazi attacks massive volatility took place in gold, silver and crude oil futures in which billions of dollars were rearranged and disguised in illegal cross-collateralized derivatives tied to Citibank and the London LIFFE Exchange.'--Tom Heneghan www.stewwebb.com... ... 121111.htm

This statement from a previous intel report by Heneghan sums up the link between this takedown of Patraeus just before he is due to testify regarding the Benghazi incident:

Petraeus was ready to finger current dysfunctional U.S. Secretary of State, loser Hillary RodenhurstClinton for ordering a U.S. military stand down as U.S. Libyan Ambassador Christopher Stevens was being assassinated by bought and paid for U.S. government provocateurs, as well as the rogue U.S. CIA data base aka Al Qaeda. -- Tom Heneghan www.stewwebb.com... ... 121111.htm

Originally posted by Unrealised
It's a nice way of sticking out the proverbial tongue to so called 'enemies' of the state.




Either that, or it has something to do with money.



Maybe it's both.

Nah, it is just accepting the reality that the battles of the future are all going to be covert, and require new strategies and approaches to dealing with threats and enemies.

Trading in shock and awe for..., WTF just happened here?

Originally posted by GArnold
I was just shocked when I read this. I had not heard a single whisper of this. At a time when there is a serious money flow issue for the Government this just seems so odd. Basically if I understand this you will have two agencies from the Government doing almost the same thing. They will be competing against each other. In my opinion it will make both the agencies less effective in the long run. Why not just take lets say 3/4 of the cost of doing this vast operation and just spend the money making the CIA more effective. Something about this just so does not make any sense whatsoever.

Actually, it makes a lot of sense, you just have to understand the details, which neither article really presents well.

Also, there's a lot of DC dynamics going on. A lot. Hang on, let me get the megaphone... A LOT. And neither article really went into that, either.

Want some summary stuff? I won't be able to back any of it up, so as far as you know I'll be pulling it out of my butt.

edit to add: Furvus and ganjoa are on the money. There's some background issues that sort of are causing it, and areas of responsibility and trustworthiness of the Agency are among them.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
If we had any proper intelligence then we wouldnt have to guess whether Iran is building nuclear weapons and a dozen of other things we appear not to know.

We don't have to guess, Iran acquired the technical support and technologies needed from Pakistan, in particular from A.Q. Khan and others, they have everything they need except the highly enriched uranium, and they could have that within a month or less.

The only thing we can guess about is whether the Israelis will launch preemptive strikes or wait for diplomacy and sanctions to work, and whether or not the USA will support Israel when the time comes or not.

It isn't a matter of IF on Iranian nukes, or when really, no mysteries there, it is a matter of what will or will not be done about it.