The document has a serious and sober title: “Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community,” and it was seriously and soberly offered to the Senate Select Committee On Intelligence yesterday by DNI James Clapper. But if the people working on this were working in all seriousness, their names were Moe, Larry and Curly, and they were drunkdrafting the entire thing. Don’t take our word for it; read it for yourself.
- ITEM: They’re still banging the gong for Global Warming as a major, existential threat, although they defensively note that they’re not using climate models to reach this conclusion, a backhanded slap at Michael “Piltdown” Mann, the climate scientist at the university most famous for its kiddie-diddling football program.
- ITEM: They manage a long discussion of the cyber threat without mentioning the damage done to US national security by the intelligence organizations’ overreach — and incompetence. No mention of how A low-level contractor walked off with more documents than all the spies in the history of espionage; no mention of how the connected beltway bandits hired to vet Snowden and tens of thousands of other contractors simply pencil-whipped the work — and received ten plus million in performance bonuses for failing to do the work. Clapper? Mussolini without the timely trains.
- ITEM: The document defines modern technologies, generally, as things used for crime and therefore to be crushed, or at least, crushingly surveilled — approached it tries to mainstream for Bitcoin, biology, and 3D printing.
- ITEM: The lead item in terrorism? “Homegrown Violent Extremists.” That’s, er, you. Although the example he uses is scarcely homegrown: the Boston Marathon bombers. In fact, what they represent is a failure of US immigration policy (we need Chechens why?) and, much more so, a failure of Clapper’s polyincompent intel empire: he was tipped that these guys were up to no good by the Russian FSB.
- ITEM: Mentioning the “difficult environment” in the post-Arab Spring Middle East, without mentioning how that is the product of (1) the US cutting previous allies loose, seriously diminishing the perceived value of allying with us, and (2) the US supporting extremist Moslem Brotherhood organizations in one country after another. Holy crap, support violent extremists and (1) you get more extremists and (2) the guys who are not extremists lose interest in you as a partner.
- ITEM: The whole section about Iran is a battered-wife’s fantasy: Rouhani is a moderate. The Iranians are just building nukes for national prestige, like a big monument or something. The Iranians aren’t real sure they want to make nukes.
- ITEM: The authors of the report are economically illiterate, suggesting that inflation will ruin debtors (inflation lets debtors pay for pennies on the dollar, and ruins creditors).
- ITEM: The whole thing is written as if the recipients were retarded. (Well, it is for the Senate, so there is that). Example:
Overall international will and capability to prevent or mitigate mass atrocities will likely diminish in 2014 and beyond, although support for human rights norms to prevent atrocities will almost certainly deepen among some non-government organizations.
Got that? No? Shorter version: “The US will stand by and let people be massacred, and international do-gooders will demand we do something!!!” Got it now?
- ITEM: They’re still supporting, as noted above, the MB/extremist faction in Egypt, excuse us, the “democratically elected” terrorist group.
- ITEM: Most of the assessments demonstrate nothing more than the writers’ keen grasp of the bleedin’ obvious. Example: “Sub-Saharan Africa will almost certainly see political and related security turmoil in 2014.” No $#!+, Sherlock? Is there a year in the last fifty where that wasn’t true? Does anyone seriously expect a year in the next fifty where that will not be true?
If this document were any more lightweight, you’d need to tie it down with ropes like a Zeppelin.
There’s a nasty suspicion in my mind that the Snowden job was a deliberate provocation. It’s not as though he has revealed anything new. And why The Guardian? Cui bono? Cloward & Piven might answer that well. As to the threat assessment….why do they call that lot the “intelligence” community? Must be that dratted PC newspeak again. Scotty, beam me up, we’ll nuke it from orbit.
These are the only acceptable threats too assess under the tyranny of the current narrative. They aren’t even assessments of fact at this point their more declarations of belief. Think those North Korean interviews in which the subject screams a series of rhetorical phrases implanted in him from a young age; like “I WILL TAKE UP ARMS AGAINST THE WESTERN IMPEAREALIST ARMIES” and “THE GREAT LEADER IS THE FATHER OF THE KOREAN PEOPLE”. It doesn’t make sense too a rational person but it must be said in order too appease those in control of your life, job and family sheathed you believe it or not.
Lightweight Presidents demand lightweight intelligence product. I expect Herbert Meyer would tell you that Reagan demanded quality product and got some.
Look at this and it is no wonder that the US Government is constantly surprised by what goes on the the world. There appears to be zero HUMINT capability, either in Langley or elsewhere in the world.
That we know of, right? As per Tom Clancy’s “Threat Vector” and the previous post about overt/covert/clandestine, I have no problem accepting clandestine PRC operations on US soil. After all, we ‘owe’ it to them to protect their investments.
I have no problem accepting clandestine PRC operations on US soil.
Interesting world you live in. ‘No problem accepting’. ? :D
Powerful nations have always spied on every other powerful nation.
The Chinese must be having a bonanza when it comes to spying right now.
FBI seems concerned with moron terrorists to the point of manufacturing those from confused potheads. It also apparently had a serious Chinese mole problem.
It also apparently never learned how to compartmentalize, because of it’s dual role as both LE agency and CI. Law enforcement requires information sharing, CI demands more security.
I really doubt they’ve wised up since then.
Ah, poorly worded on my part. I meant to say that I have no problem accepting PRC operations on US soil, in the sense of believing that they exist. I did NOT mean that I was accepting in the sense of being happy with the belief.
But I was just responding to Pericles’ conflation of zero HUMINT capability in Langley with zero HUMINT capability in the rest of the world. The potential that we wouldn’t know it exists seemed to be a possible epitome of Hognose’s distinction of clandestine.
I must proofread better. :)
I expect Herbert Meyer would tell you that Reagan demanded quality product and got some.
Reagan was a fucking actor who wouldn’t have recognized quality product had it bitten him in the arse.
What does that make Obama?
A spokesperson with delusions of control.
I humbly suggest you read Mikhail Gorbachev’s counter-argument to that specious contention, in his recollections of dealing with the man one-on-one in Reykjavik.
Presuming you’re interested in factual evidence, rather than naked opinion.
I had to skip to the last page.
“Any resemblance to actual intelligence information, proposed national objectives, countries, persons, or organizations is completely coincidental and entirely unintentional.“
Pingback: » February 2, 2014