Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
And this right here is one of the best posts in this thread.
And in simplest form illustrates the problem with the U.S. intelligence services.
However it sounds to me like the Military Intelligence side is vastly improved since 9/11
|
Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, recently stated that their own intelligence was extremely poor and inadequate on predicting the Arab Spring uprisings of 2011. Additionally, the U.S. has had extremely close calls with the failed attempts of the Christmas and Times Square bombers. Luckily, a mix of poorly-developed bomb devices and aware citizens prevented such attacks.
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence was created to help solve collaboration and information sharing issues, but such reforms have been modest at best. For example, introducing the IC's version of Wikipedia called "Intellipedia" to better share information more easily among all analysts, has not made its way into the official, mandatory analysis workflow, and thus is a microchasm of a larger information sharingp problem - agencies dont trust each other, and will often create duplicate information that confuses policy makers not knowing which form of intelligence is the 'official' record. People will look to the CIA or NSA because of their size, but often times, it is the smaller IC agencies that have the critical information. the National Geo-Spatial Agency is one of the agencies known to have critical MASINT, but doesn't always share it.
Anyways, such problems plagued the IC before and after 9/11; those problems are chronic and continue to exist, among sprawling expansion and out-of-control agency budgets. It's all a recipe for disaster to strike again.