[Intelforum] Fixing intelligence
mikeanders at verizon.net
Mon Dec 12 11:09:09 EST 2005
"Offensive Counterintelligence" has been a "four-letter-word" for a very
long time in the United States. Ms. Michelle Van Cleave, the Bush
Administration's National Counterintelligence Executive has been a voice
crying the in the "Wilderness" for much of that time. Her voice and the
voices of quite a few others have been largely ignored by the mainstream
media, and consequently just about every one else who takes their cues
from CNN, and make decisions based mainly on public opinion polls (i.e.,
certain current and former members of the U.S. Congress who shall go
unnamed). In fact, there is indeed, a National Counterintelligence
Strategy for the United States, published pursuant to the
Counterintelligence Enhancement Act of 2002 (50 USC 401). It is even
"named" the "National Counterintelligence Strategy of the United States
The Strategy includes both defensive and offensive activities. Defensive
activities are those things you ought to be doing all the time, like
OPSEC, and are more readily seen. Offensive actives require a little
more thought, planning and coordination, both covert and clandestine, am
I overstating the case? What do you think?
Rocco R Rosano wrote:
>At the risk of sounding a bit like a "smart ass," Newt Gingrich's
>commentary is a marginally accurate statement of the obvious.
>Back a few years ago, there was the NSSG Discussion Group hosted by the
>US Commission on National Security (USCNS); and Newt Gingrich was a
>Commissioner. The archive for the actual discussions are gone now, but
>if you had participated, you will have noticed that, PRIOR to the events
>of 911, many of the shortcomings of the Intelligence Community (IC) were
>discussed. In fact, the use of aircraft as terrorist tactical weapon was
>actually mentioned (to no avail).
>The problems in the IC proper, and those within the Department of
>Defense (DOD) have been in the making since the days of Vietnam (three
>decades or more). It did not just break on 911. Everyone in a position
>of trust and responsibility in the IC failed when it came to creating
>efficiencies in the system, organizational command and control,
>professional development and long-term maintenance of the field assets,
>and the placement of ground truth walkers in regions and area of
>economic, political and military importance.
>One of the aspects that disappointed me about the UCNS (NSSG)
>discussions was the predisposition of the Commission towards
>"mitigation" and NOT "prevention."
>The key to combating terrorism, espionage, sabotage and spreading of
>sedition is an offensive counterintelligence (CI) program. CI is
>distinctly unique because it is the "only" discipline that is mandated
>to “protect against.” It is a fundamental distinction lost on the
>leaderships of the DNI, CIA and DOD.
>If we are to gain anything by the Gingrich commentary, it is to remember
>that it is a well educated pot calling the kettle black. When the USCNS
>Commission actually enetered into the discussion, it argued "against"
>the concept of detection, exploitation and neutralization (DEN) of
>hostiles at their point of origin.
>Yes, what he says is true, but it is not a result of any special insight.
>prosano at insight.rr.com
>Mike Yared wrote:
>>mike_yared at hotmail.com
>>IntelForum mailing list
>>IntelForum at lists101.his.com
>IntelForum mailing list
>IntelForum at lists101.his.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the IntelForum