|
|||
|
Obama’s Intel Nominee Doesn’t Get ItPosted on Jul 21, 2010
By Ruth Marcus If I were President Barack Obama, I’d be seriously rethinking James Clapper’s nomination to be director of national intelligence. At the very least, I’d call him in—along with the umpty-ump other intelligence chieftains—and order up another look at the serious problems with the sprawling intelligence bureaucracy exposed by The Washington Post. This time, not from the posture of a defensive crouch. The Post team, led by the invaluable Dana Priest, depicted the unwieldy intelligence apparatus that mushroomed in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. “After nine years of unprecedented spending and growth,” Priest and William M. Arkin wrote, “the result is that the system put in place to keep the United States safe is so massive that its effectiveness is impossible to determine.” No one has—it is hard to see how a single human being could have—a handle on the proliferating activities, with 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies working on counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence. As Army Lt. Gen. John R. Vines, who reviewed the Defense Department’s programs last year, told the Post, “I’m not aware of any agency with the authority, responsibility or a process in place to coordinate all these interagency and commercial activities.” The inevitable result, he said, is “message dissonance, reduced effectiveness and waste. We consequently can’t effectively assess whether it is making us more safe.” Advertisement The agency issued a five-page “fact sheet” on the post-9/11 intelligence community and a two-page myths/realities sheet on contractors. One example: “Myth: The Intelligence Community does not have an accurate picture of its contractor ranks and does not exercise proper oversight over that community. Reality: The IC is a leader in taking a serious, systematic approach to planning and managing its core contract personnel.” Contrast that with this quote from Defense Secretary Robert Gates: “This is a terrible confession. I can’t get a number on how many contractors work for the Office of the Secretary of Defense.” Gates’ reality, anyway, sounds awfully like the alleged myth. Most concerning, this defensiveness continued in Clapper’s confirmation hearing Tuesday before the Senate intelligence committee. “I think there was some breathless and shrillness to it that I don’t subscribe to,” he told the panel. “I think she’s [Priest] extrapolated from ... her anecdotal experience.” And later, “I think she’s striven for a bit of sensationalism here.” Unnecessary, overlapping, redundant efforts? “One man’s duplication is another man’s competitive analysis,” Clapper said. True. When you’re dealing with potentially catastrophic failure, you should build in redundancy. But that kind of deliberate overlap is not the situation the Post described. It was more like chaotic—and counterproductive—duplication. To his credit, Clapper acknowledged some legitimate points—for instance, overlaps in looking at what he called “threat finance”—how terrorists, drug traffickers and others get, and move, their money. “That’s one area I will take to heart,” he said. Overall, however, his reaction was disappointing. The series was anything but breathless, shrill and sensationalist. It was serious, detailed, fact-based—and deeply disturbing. The senators questioning Clapper seemed to understand this, because they kept coming back to it. That Clapper felt the need to respond with this kind of language does not bode well for his tenure as the fourth director of national intelligence in its five years of existence. New and Improved CommentsWe are launching a major overhaul of our comments section. In addition to more robust spam filtering and moderation, new features include the ability to rate other comments, sort how they are displayed and respond directly via e-mail or in a thread. Unfortunately, commenters will lose their existing Truthdig identities. It's a pain, we know, but on the plus side you will now be able to log in with a plethora of options, including Google, Twitter, Facebook and Disqus accounts. Before launching this system we spent months in discussion with our top commenters. We listened to the feedback and we hope you like what we've come up with. Please direct any problems or concerns to us via our contact page. |
By LocalHero, July 24, 2010 at 9:47 pm Link to this comment
This article starts from the flawed premise that the “intelligence community” (those two words make me almost as sick as “serving your country”) has some sort of interest in “keeping us safe” which is laughable. Their only real interest is in “keeping us scared” so that mountains of money keep flowing to these mercenaries. The fact is, we’d be far better off with NO spook community than with these Nazi’s.
Report thisBy gerard, July 24, 2010 at 9:27 am Link to this comment
bernheim: It’s not just “rot at the top” in my opinion. The “top” will do whatever the “bnottom” and the “middle” allow them to do—will even cooperate with them in doing it.
Report thisThe country runs on the myth that everybody can get to the “top” through hard work or some other demeaning enterprise such as obeying orders,charging interest, cheating,lieing,pretending, buying cheap and selling high.
If you don’t succeed at this, you are nobody. Unfortunately, the huge majority of Americans believe this, and at the moment are killing people thousands of miles away just to preserve the system. Evidence of other possibilities is ignored.
This “top-down” myth destroys sympathy and understanding. It breeds selfishness and greed.
The “top” in their “general headquarters” (army language not accidental) care little or nothing for the “bottom” 90%. Proof: They do little to help anybody but themselves and do everything in their power to maintain the status quo, such as it is.
Neither Obama nor anybody else can do anything without massive support from the 98% who are too scared to draw a deep breath. What keeps them down?
The myth and the degrading results of believing it.
By George Bachmann, July 24, 2010 at 7:12 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
A good solution might be to leave the position
unfilled, and then gradually starve that absurd
agency out of existence (i.e., gradually cut the
budget to ‘0’. Of course, that will happen only
when the Congress becomes ‘wise’ or Hell freezes
over.
GB
Report thisBy berniem, July 23, 2010 at 4:48 am Link to this comment
Unfortunately, empires are essentially like those poor souls with a genetic predisposition to dementia. As they say, the mind is the first thing to go followed by the the brain’s progressive deterioration to the point of loss of bodily function resulting in death. Think of all of the politicians at all levels along with their toadies and private sector remoras as the plaque invading the cerebral vascular system and there you have the basis for what may be termed indelicately as “rot at the top”. It’s always easy to blame the size of government as the cause of all our woes when the issue lies really with the over complexity of the structure imposed by the arcane demands of legalese as well as the infectious nature of corruption contracted via constant exposure to an economic system which acts as a rapacious cancer on the societal soma.
Report thisBy wildflower, July 21, 2010 at 9:10 pm Link to this comment
Re Marcus: “. . . this defensiveness continued in Clapper’s confirmation hearing Tuesday before the Senate intelligence committee. “I think there was some breathless and shrillness to it that I don’t subscribe to,” he told the panel.”
One wonders how Clapper could ever expect to know anything about anything since the Senate Intelligence Committee failed to give the Office of the Director of National Intelligence enough resources to adequately determine problems or the authority to resolve any problems that his Office might find:
“Mr. Clapper on Tuesday faced the Senate Intelligence Committee, which, of course, was greatly responsible for making sure the Office of the Director of National Intelligence did not have the needed resources or authority in the first place. Mr. Clapper persuaded us that he intends to try to take charge, but we’re not sure he fully recognizes the scope of that commitment.
The director’s job — the brainchild of the independent Sept. 11 commission — is supposed to tame rivalries among 16 competing agencies and provide strategic direction. Yet Congress deprived the director of the authority to set budgets or hire and fire leaders. Other intelligence power centers — the C.I.A., White House and Pentagon — have blocked the director from doing his job.”
[Quote NYT Editorial: “Misdirection of National Intelligence” July 22, 2010]
http://www.nytimes.com/
Report thisBy Devin Wallace, July 21, 2010 at 4:53 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
It’s time that the typical Washington appointee is not someone who is an apologist for the status quo and instead is someone who will push for institutional change. The American public realizes that change is needed (not Obama change) and yet administration after administration fills their Cabinet and other high positions with men intent on keeping things the way they are, if not expanding them to even more destructive levels.
Report thisBy gerard, July 21, 2010 at 3:15 pm Link to this comment
If your goal is to use fear of enemies to hold your entire population in thrall, too scared to think straight and therefore easy to manipulate, you set up proliferating intelligence/surveillance agencies that fall all over each other looking for trouble at home and abroad. Keep both the agencies and the general population busy with rumors and suspicions and every now and then bring some “investigation” to light and give it wide publicity to make you look efficient. In the process, destroy as many civil liberties as you can get your hands on, shred habeas corpus and see that it is not restored. Let your public education go to pieces for want of funding, and promote radical religious beliefs that refuse to tolerate differences. Arm people to the teeth with handguns, assault rifles and whatever else
Report thisthey demand in order to “protect themselves.”
Are we there yet?
By gerard, July 21, 2010 at 3:15 pm Link to this comment
If your goal is to use fear of enemies to hold your entire population in thrall, too scared to think straight and therefore easy to manipulate, you set up proliferating intelligence/surveillance agencies that fall all over each other looking for trouble at home and abroad. Keep both the agencies and the general population busy with rumors and suspicions and every now and then bring some “investigation” to light and give it wide publicity to make you look efficient. In the process, destroy as many civil liberties as you can get your hands on, shred habeas corpus and see that it is not restored. Let your public education go to pieces for want of funding, and promote radical religious beliefs that refuse to tolerate differences. Arm people to the teeth with handguns, assault rifles and whatever else
Report thisthey demand in order to “protect themselves.”
Are we there yet?