Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
How Hamas duped Israel
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RDKirk" data-source="post: 77650654" data-attributes="member: 326155"><p>That wasn't infighting, that was public law passed by Congress. Congress erected what we call "The Wall" between the foreign and domestic intelligence agencies in the US, and that wall still exists.</p><p></p><p>Let's say an FBI intelligence analyst is tracking the background of a suspicious person, Mohammed Atef, and the info trail backward stops at the point he entered the country. That FBI analyst can't simply ring up a contact in the CIA or DIA to get further background information on Atef.</p><p></p><p>He has to draw up a formal requisition for cross-agency information.--something like a search warrant--and send it up the entire FBI chain of command, which will evaluate it for pertinence and relevancy with whatever else they're doing. It can't just be a hunch, it's got to have enough evidence to convince his own higher-ups that he's actually on to something significant. It's got to be a whole hypothesis with supporting background information. If so, it will be passed at a commensurably high level across to the top of the CIA chain of command, and they're going to repeat that vetting process down their chain. Everyone is trying to adhere to the law...nobody in the chain wants to be the one hauled in to testify before Congress. Eventually it may reach the right analyst who had been following Atef across the Middle East, or who may be able to trace him.</p><p></p><p>Presuming the CIA analyst has information, that's got to go back up his chain of command, then back across to the FBI senior levels, then back down the chain of command to the original FBI analyst.</p><p></p><p>It's not an easy process; Congress did not intend for it to be an easy process.</p><p></p><p>I had a boss back when I was at Pearl Harbor, Navy admiral Lowell Jacoby, a brilliant man who taught me much, who later became Director of the DIA. Since the early 90s, he'd had a vision of a secure, self-contained intelligence network like the Internet that would have newsgroups and chat rooms where desk analysts could discuss theories and share information. Alas, it could never be. That network is in place...but so, still, is The Wall.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RDKirk, post: 77650654, member: 326155"] That wasn't infighting, that was public law passed by Congress. Congress erected what we call "The Wall" between the foreign and domestic intelligence agencies in the US, and that wall still exists. Let's say an FBI intelligence analyst is tracking the background of a suspicious person, Mohammed Atef, and the info trail backward stops at the point he entered the country. That FBI analyst can't simply ring up a contact in the CIA or DIA to get further background information on Atef. He has to draw up a formal requisition for cross-agency information.--something like a search warrant--and send it up the entire FBI chain of command, which will evaluate it for pertinence and relevancy with whatever else they're doing. It can't just be a hunch, it's got to have enough evidence to convince his own higher-ups that he's actually on to something significant. It's got to be a whole hypothesis with supporting background information. If so, it will be passed at a commensurably high level across to the top of the CIA chain of command, and they're going to repeat that vetting process down their chain. Everyone is trying to adhere to the law...nobody in the chain wants to be the one hauled in to testify before Congress. Eventually it may reach the right analyst who had been following Atef across the Middle East, or who may be able to trace him. Presuming the CIA analyst has information, that's got to go back up his chain of command, then back across to the FBI senior levels, then back down the chain of command to the original FBI analyst. It's not an easy process; Congress did not intend for it to be an easy process. I had a boss back when I was at Pearl Harbor, Navy admiral Lowell Jacoby, a brilliant man who taught me much, who later became Director of the DIA. Since the early 90s, he'd had a vision of a secure, self-contained intelligence network like the Internet that would have newsgroups and chat rooms where desk analysts could discuss theories and share information. Alas, it could never be. That network is in place...but so, still, is The Wall. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
How Hamas duped Israel
Top
Bottom