Pages: 1

 

2007-07-30 11:14:29
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,992|7074|949

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070730/hillhouse

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) revealed in May that 70 percent of the intelligence budget goes to contractors.

More than 70 percent of the staff of the Pentagon's newest intelligence unit, CIFA (Counterintelligence Field Activity), is made up of corporate contractors.

Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) lawyers revealed at a conference in May that contractors make up 51 percent of the staff in DIA offices.

Between 50 and 60 percent of the workforce of the CIA's most important directorate, the National Clandestine Service (NCS), responsible for the gathering of human intelligence, is composed of employees of for-profit corporations.
Is it in the best interest of Americans to allow for-profit companies to conduct surveillance? 

Is it in the best interest of Americans to allow for-profit companies to review our intelligence and suggest action?

Is it in the best interest of the Government to allow for-profit companies to have access to intelligence and suggest policy?

I am not OK with these types of implementations.  The potential for abuse far outweighs any possible positive output these types of relationships can create.

Discuss.

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2007-07-30 11:14:48)

2007-07-30 11:16:57
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|7086
I knew this.  It was shocking when i found out.  Read Robert Baer for some good insight.  another example of bush cronism and being in the pockets of mega corporations.
2007-07-30 11:18:24
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6971|Global Command
Insanity.


Which saddly is just not shocking anymore.
The shocking part is the percentage of people that vote who vote for either Republican or Democrat only.

The Democrats were just as almost as sinister as the Bush admin.
2007-07-30 11:22:14
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|7178|Salt Lake City

There are a lot of things the government should outsource to private contracts, but intelligence of this nature/level should not be one of them.
2007-07-30 11:24:31
oug
Calmer than you are.
+380|6961|Πάϊ

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

I knew this.  It was shocking when i found out.
This is all new to me, and its damn shocking now!

I can't even begin to imagine all the shit that's caused by this...
ƒ³
2007-07-30 11:25:37
Lost Hope
Lurker
+20|6769|Brussels, Belgium

oug wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

I knew this.  It was shocking when i found out.
This is all new to me, and its damn shocking now!

I can't even begin to imagine all the shit that's caused by this...
The war in Iraq...
https://bf3s.com/sigs/9c9f8f6ff3579a4c711aa54bbb9e928ec0786003.png
2007-07-30 11:27:24
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6836|The Gem Saloon
call me an asshat, and feel free to tell me why im wrong, but i think this is a good idea.......TO AN EXTENT.


these people are doing it for money....straight up. if they want to get paid, they do the job correctly.

"Counterintelligence Field Activity". i personally feel that is a great thing to outsource.....once someone knows that a CIA operator is who he/she is, they are useless, except behind a desk at Langley.....so much training, that the government paid for can be done with one look.....if we outsource that, we "lose" less people. when i say lose, i mean the whole "persona non grata" deal.


anyway, rip me a new one.
2007-07-30 11:31:31
Lost Hope
Lurker
+20|6769|Brussels, Belgium

Parker wrote:

call me an asshat, and feel free to tell me why im wrong, but i think this is a good idea.......TO AN EXTENT.


these people are doing it for money....straight up. if they want to get paid, they do the job correctly.

"Counterintelligence Field Activity". i personally feel that is a great thing to outsource.....once someone knows that a CIA operator is who he/she is, they are useless, except behind a desk at Langley.....so much training, that the government paid for can be done with one look.....if we outsource that, we "lose" less people. when i say lose, i mean the whole "persona non grata" deal.


anyway, rip me a new one.
Yes, but it can be in the contractor's interests to make up information, just look at the war in Iraq, the contractors are making themselves balls of gold from the government money.

Last edited by Lost Hope (2007-07-30 11:31:50)

https://bf3s.com/sigs/9c9f8f6ff3579a4c711aa54bbb9e928ec0786003.png
2007-07-30 11:32:10
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6971|Global Command
He's got a point. The government is incomptent and serves Mexico.
Private citizens might do a better job.
2007-07-30 11:32:26
topal63
. . .
+533|7160

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070730/hillhouse

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) revealed in May that 70 percent of the intelligence budget goes to contractors.

More than 70 percent of the staff of the Pentagon's newest intelligence unit, CIFA (Counterintelligence Field Activity), is made up of corporate contractors.

Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) lawyers revealed at a conference in May that contractors make up 51 percent of the staff in DIA offices.

Between 50 and 60 percent of the workforce of the CIA's most important directorate, the National Clandestine Service (NCS), responsible for the gathering of human intelligence, is composed of employees of for-profit corporations.
Is it in the best interest of Americans to allow for-profit companies to conduct surveillance? 

Is it in the best interest of Americans to allow for-profit companies to review our intelligence and suggest action?

Is it in the best interest of the Government to allow for-profit companies to have access to intelligence and suggest policy?

I am not OK with these types of implementations.  The potential for abuse far outweighs any possible positive output these types of relationships can create.

Discuss.
F! - no. I am not OK with this either - and yet it is part; indicative; of a current (admin.) trend.

This is no different than corporate mercenaries - doing military jobs - the military could do better and cheaper. Why do we train & pay enlisted men so they can train a military contractor - to do the job someone else was already doing (at a higher price! sometimes 3 to 4x).

In both circumstances it is evidence of a pure corruption of the system.

What he said:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

I knew this.  It was shocking when i found out.  Read Robert Baer for some good insight.  another example of bush cronyism and being in the pockets of mega corporations.

Parker wrote:

These people are doing it for money....straight up. If they want to get paid, they do the job correctly.
That is a meaningless argument. No one in the CIA, FBI, ODNI, DIA, CIFA, NCS, etc... has been drafted. They aren't conscripts buddy. They are already getting paid to do a job - the corporate scheme / middleman scheme is just that - it's a scheme. It's a way of syphoning money from the system.

Last edited by topal63 (2007-07-30 11:56:22)

2007-07-30 11:36:58
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6836|The Gem Saloon

Lost Hope wrote:

Parker wrote:

call me an asshat, and feel free to tell me why im wrong, but i think this is a good idea.......TO AN EXTENT.


these people are doing it for money....straight up. if they want to get paid, they do the job correctly.

"Counterintelligence Field Activity". i personally feel that is a great thing to outsource.....once someone knows that a CIA operator is who he/she is, they are useless, except behind a desk at Langley.....so much training, that the government paid for can be done with one look.....if we outsource that, we "lose" less people. when i say lose, i mean the whole "persona non grata" deal.


anyway, rip me a new one.
Yes, but it can be in the contractor's interests to make up information, just look at the war in Iraq, the contractors are making themselves balls of gold from the government money.
yes, i am aware of that, and it would be an issue that would need to be regulated with extreme prejudice. make an example out of the people that do it, maybe the others will think twice about trying it.
but i said i believe it was a good idea to an extent......couldnt be done with everything, but some things, i think it would be very successful.
2007-07-30 11:40:57
Lost Hope
Lurker
+20|6769|Brussels, Belgium

Parker wrote:

Lost Hope wrote:

Parker wrote:

call me an asshat, and feel free to tell me why im wrong, but i think this is a good idea.......TO AN EXTENT.


these people are doing it for money....straight up. if they want to get paid, they do the job correctly.

"Counterintelligence Field Activity". i personally feel that is a great thing to outsource.....once someone knows that a CIA operator is who he/she is, they are useless, except behind a desk at Langley.....so much training, that the government paid for can be done with one look.....if we outsource that, we "lose" less people. when i say lose, i mean the whole "persona non grata" deal.


anyway, rip me a new one.
Yes, but it can be in the contractor's interests to make up information, just look at the war in Iraq, the contractors are making themselves balls of gold from the government money.
yes, i am aware of that, and it would be an issue that would need to be regulated with extreme prejudice. make an example out of the people that do it, maybe the others will think twice about trying it.
but i said i believe it was a good idea to an extent......couldnt be done with everything, but some things, i think it would be very successful.
I think that even with gestapo like regulations, it would still be a problem because the corporations would lose less than what they won by doing it, the Iraq war example comes to mind again.

But I'm not fond of privatizations in general so I guess I'm not very neutral.
https://bf3s.com/sigs/9c9f8f6ff3579a4c711aa54bbb9e928ec0786003.png
2007-07-30 14:15:26
oug
Calmer than you are.
+380|6961|Πάϊ

Parker wrote:

these people are doing it for money....straight up. if they want to get paid, they do the job correctly.
I can see where you're coming from. It's the general ideal that if you work hard and do your job right you get pad for it accordingly. But intel is not like other jobs where you can easily measure one's work. It's probably the dodgiest line of work ever! It would be a piece of cake to make up stuff just to prove that you are actually necessary and that you're doing a good job. Those people must indeed have endless opportunities of ripping off the system. Come to think of it though, it's not so much worse than government intel. They too are free to do practically whatever they want...
ƒ³
2007-07-30 15:54:37
GorillaTicTacs
Member
+231|6815|Kyiv, Ukraine

Parker wrote:

call me an asshat, and feel free to tell me why im wrong, but i think this is a good idea.......TO AN EXTENT.


these people are doing it for money....straight up. if they want to get paid, they do the job correctly.

"Counterintelligence Field Activity". i personally feel that is a great thing to outsource.....once someone knows that a CIA operator is who he/she is, they are useless, except behind a desk at Langley.....so much training, that the government paid for can be done with one look.....if we outsource that, we "lose" less people. when i say lose, i mean the whole "persona non grata" deal.


anyway, rip me a new one.
Happily.  Contractors, whose sole company purpose is to work for fat government contracts, behave absolutely no more efficiently than a direct government entity.  They're allowed to be over-budget, over-time, and deliver absolutely shit without any recourse from the taxpayer.
2007-07-30 15:57:12
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6732|Éire
Don't you guys contract out your voting systems to private companies as well? We saw what happened there.
2007-07-30 17:02:09
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6836|The Gem Saloon
well, no one has put forth any proof to make me think otherwise, so ill stick with my above mentioned belief.
2007-07-30 18:36:03
oug
Calmer than you are.
+380|6961|Πάϊ
Well, what kind of proof do you expect? Even if someone bothered to look, I'm sure some lame cover up attempt would appear as well. If it were clear that the private contractors were unsuitable for the job they wouldn't still be there... For the same reason, nobody is asking you for any proof of your theory.
ƒ³
2007-07-30 19:18:59
Comrade Ogilvy
Member
+7|6572
I believe the New Republic has and always has had a credibilty problem.
2007-07-30 19:34:35
<BoTM>J_Aero
Qualified Expert
+62|6907|Melbourne - Home of Football
The argument against this practice should be and is very simple. Intelligence agencies work on the premise that their workforce is unswervingly loyal to the agency and to the country, despite the bitter experiences the job may bring. They take many measures to test and ensure this. The money they are being paid is really just renumeration to people that work hard to defend a country, their country.

Once you bring private contractors into the picture, the salary is taking a more important role in things, and once its about your wage it becomes who is the highest bidder, not where your loyalties lie. An agent of an intelligence service working in a foreign country is protected from bribes by his loyalty to the job, and his belief in what he is doing. An agent in a foreign country because he is getting paid to be there is susceptible to counter-offers from competing governments.
2007-07-30 21:16:39
CommieChipmunk
Member
+488|7012|Portland, OR, USA

ATG wrote:

He's got a point. The government is incomptent and serves Mexico.
Private citizens might do a better job.
Yes.. but private rich citizens (or corporations).  Rich people only care about rich people.

ftl..
2007-07-31 05:18:46
GorillaTicTacs
Member
+231|6815|Kyiv, Ukraine
Once you let war (and the intelligence serving it) become a strictly for-profit industry, you get ridiculous situations like bogus wars based on faulty intelligence and crippling national debt with a lion's share of the profits being dumped on private contractors while the troops and their equipment get broken and they're denied healthcare when they get home.

Oh, wait.  Shit.

But, don't take my word for it.

USMC Major General Smedley Butler (and 2 time Medal of Honor recipient) said it best:
WAR IS A RACKET!

Money quote:
"And above all, Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace... War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the people who have the courage to meet it."

He rattles off numbers from the WW1 era, but just multiply by a kajillion and you get today's numbers.

Interestingly, he also blew the whistle to Congress in a story revealed recently on the BBC about a 1935 attempted fascist coup of the US involving granpappy Bush and company and 500,000 WW1 vets.  Too bad the closest we can get today is Wesley Clark.  I'd kill to have 2 Butlers and an Eisenhower in power right now.

Last edited by GorillaTicTacs (2007-07-31 05:22:07)

 

Pages: 1

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard