Back to Basics

A former CIA officer was indicted Thursday for allegedly leaking classified information to a journalist working for The New York Times, including the name of a covert CIA officer and information revealing the role of another CIA employee involved in classified counterterrorism activities, according to officials from the U.S. Justice Department.

John Kiriakou was charged in a five-count indictment handed down by a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia, after he was initially charged in a criminal complaint and arrested in January 2012.

The CIA is becoming more and more politicized. Credit: CIA Factbook

The government agency responsible for providing national security data to the nation’s senior policymakers, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), operates a special center dedicated to global warming, according to a recent report.

One complaint often heard privately within law enforcement circles is that the Central Intelligence Agency over the years has morphed into a liberal-left — or progressive – think tank rather than maintaining its role as a strategic and tactical intelligence agency.

An even bigger concern is that the agency has become overly politicized and prone to leaking information to the mainstream news media in order to have an impact upon the political climate within the Beltway.

The need to insulate intelligence from political pressure is a powerful argument for maintaining a strong, centralized capability and not leaving intelligence bearing on national concern up to individual policy making departments. Competitive analysis of controversial questions can also help guard against politicization.

Competitive or redundant analysis needs to be carried out and conveyed to policymakers in those areas where being wrong can have major consequences. The leaders of the intelligence community must reinforce the ethic that speaking the truth to those in power is required, and defend anyone who comes under criticism for so doing even if it’s the Attorney General who is the critic.

However, the decision-makers at the CIA are once again failing to avoid politicization. That’s because CIA political appointees from the Obama Administration don’t want American citizens to know what goes on in its two-year-old Center on Climate Change and National Security.

So the exclusive unit, led by “senior specialists,” operates under a cloak of secrecy that rejects all public-records requests, despite President Obama’s promise to run a transparent government, according to a Judicial Watch blog..

When the center was launched in 2009, the CIA said it would not address the science of climate change but rather the national security impact of phenomena such as desertification, rising sea levels, population shifts and heightened competition for natural resources. The new division was touted as an important tool that would bring together in a single place expertise on an important national security topic; the effect environmental factors can have on political, economic and social stability overseas.

“Reasonably, some U.S. taxpayers want to know what exactly the center has been doing with their money. After all, Obama has repeatedly assured the country that he will run the most transparent administration in history. So why not reveal some of the CIA’s findings on the impacts of global warming? After all, the administration has dedicated huge amounts of money to combat the ills of global warming so why not make public some of the “intelligence” that could justify the investment?” asks the JW blogger.

“Because everything the CIA’s climate center does is a national security secret, according to a report published this month by a group of scientists dedicated to exposing government secrecy.”

The group Federation of American Scientists cites a categorical denial by the CIA to a benign Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for a copy of any study or report concerning the impacts of global warming. The request was made by an intelligence historian affiliated with the National Security Archive.

Documents recently released by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) demonstrate the valuable information gained by so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques,” that ultimately led to the recent killing of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. A non-partisan watchdog group obtained the documents as a result of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit.

In March 2011, Judicial Watch — a public-interest organization that investigates and prosecutes government corruption — released documents obtained from the Department of Defense (DOD) detailing the policies of the Bush administration related to the detention of “enemy combatants” at Guantanamo Bay, as well as the significant risks posed to the general population if the detainees were released.

The documents include a February 4, 2004, draft presentation entitled “Guantanamo Detainees” previously marked “Not for Public Dissemination.” It specifically references the role of “couriers” in the bin Laden network, noting that enemy combatants at Guantanamo Bay include “members of al-Qaeda’s international terrorism support network, including financiers, couriers, recruiters and operatives.”

The DOD documents obtained by Judicial Watch further state that “Detainees have revealed al-Qaeda leadership structures, operatives, funding mechanisms, communications methods, training and selection programs, travel patterns, support infrastructures, and plans for attacking the United States and other countries” and “information on [Osama bin Laden] personal security procedures.”

This is consistent with documents previously obtained in a separate Judicial Watch lawsuit that detail the overall effectiveness of “enhanced interrogation techniques” against captured terrorists.

According to a June 1, 2005, CIA report entitled, Detainee Reporting Pivotal for the War Against Al-Qaeda:

“Detainee reporting accounts for more than half of all HUMINT [human intelligence] reporting on al-Qaeda since the program began…”

Interestingly, this fact was omitted in later versions of the report obtained by Judicial Watch. All versions, however, conclude: “One of the gains to detaining the additional terrorists has been the thwarting of a number of al-Qaeda operations in the United States and overseas.”

Following the capture and killing of Osama bin Laden, multiple news outlets stated intelligence from detainees identified the courier who ultimately led Navy SEALs to the front door of the million-dollar compound that housed bin Laden.

According to The Washington Times:“The debate over the use of harsh interrogation techniques during the Bush administration is being rekindled by the successful operation against Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan, which was based on information about the courier extracted from detained terror suspects.”

Despite the effectiveness of “enhanced interrogation techniques,” the federal government suspended their use in 2005 by passing the Detainee Treatment Act. President Obama officially banned the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” during his first week in office in January 2009. Two months later, in March 2009, President Obama overruled objections from national security officials and released documents detailing the government’s enhanced interrogation program (the so-called “torture” memos), according to officials at Judicial Watch.

General Petraeus will be the most qualified member of the so-called Obama national security team. Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

With the likelihood that the new Director of Central Intelligence will be the International Security Assistance Force Commander, Army General David H. Petraeus, perhaps there is a chance for the embattled CIA to become more than a quasi-think tank for the Washington, D.C. elitists.

The United States’ intelligence community is undergoing the most extensive – perhaps even radical – transformations since the Office of Strategic Services gave way to the Central Intelligence Agency. Recognizing the fact that people are the critical element in intelligence initiatives is the key to a successful transformation of the intelligence community and related homeland security organizations.

Successful major change management initiatives in large public and private sector organizations can often take at least 5 to 7 years to create what is needed to ensure success. As a result, committed and sustained leadership is indispensable to making lasting changes within the intelligence community.

Perhaps General Petraeus possesses such leadership qualities that have been lacking in the last two CIA heads.

For example, outgoing CIA head Leon Panetta was lacking many of the attributes necessary for an effective and successful Director of Central Intelligence, according to a former intelligence and police official.

“When the Egyptian people rose up to oust their President, CIA Director Leon Panetta testified before Congress that there was a ‘strong likelihood’ that Mubarak would step down by the end of the day. When proved wrong, Panetta explained he was getting his information from the media. The top official at the top intelligence agency admitted he got his information from the likes of the New York Times? That’s nonsense.” said former intelligence officer and police commander Michael Snopes.

One of the major challenges facing the intelligence community is moving from a culture of “need to know” to a “need to share” organizations, while maintaining secrecy. The experience of leading organizations suggests that performance management systems – that define, align, and integrate institutional, unit, and individual performance with organizational goals – can provide incentives and accountability for sharing information to help achieve this shift.

Some critics of the CIA claim that over the years it has become more of a “think tank” than an intelligence gathering and counterterrorism organization. One official alleges that politics within “The Company” resembles the politics exhibited at American universities, with bureaucrats “living in ivory towers far removed from the real world of espionage and terrorism.”

Significant changes have been underway in the last 3 years regarding how the federal workforce is managed. The Congress passed legislation providing certain government-wide human resources flexibilities, such as direct hiring authority by agency executives. While many federal agencies have received such flexibility, others may be both needed and appropriate for intelligence agencies, such as providing these agencies with the authority to hire a limited number of term-appointed positions on a noncompetitive basis.

The CIA had a business relationship with a degenerate gambler, according to sources. Photo: Reno News

Officials from the Central Intelligence Agency were bamboozled into using a phony software program that its creator claimed could help intelligence, military and law enforcement personnel in detecting terrorist plots. Besides the CIA, the U.S. Air Force was also a victim of the same scheme.

An intelligence source told the Law Enforcement Examiner that federal agency personnel are not revealing information regarding the alleged hoax citing national security concerns.

Some sources claim the hoax has cost the federal government upwards of $20 million since 2003, when it contracted California computer programmer Dennis Montgomery, now 57-years old, to decipher coded messages hidden in the TV broadcasts of Arab news network Al Jazeera using a software he developed.

The U.S. Justice Department, which received orders from two federal judges to keep details of the technology out of public view, claims it is guarding state secrets that may threaten national security if revealed.

Originally a biomedical technician with an alleged gambling problem, Montgomery cloak-and-dagger activities caused terrorism scares as well as late night White House national security briefings.

Even Montgomery’s former lawyer, Michael Flynn, says he believes Montgomery is a con man and the Central Intelligence Agency and the Air Force repeatedly and completely missed the warning signs.

According to his former lawyer Flynn, Montgomery will soon go on trial in Las Vegas for allegedly trying to pass $1.8 million in bad checks at casinos. He also made headlines in Nevada when he claimed Governor Gibbons accepted bribes, which was never proven.

In spite revelations of Montgomery’s shady background, the federal government has not attempted to charge him with any wrongdoing.  Also, neither the Pentagon or the CIA attempted thus far recovered any of the taxpayer money paid to Montgomery in his large-scale scam.

The White House is engaged in a full-court press to sell the idea that there is nothing to worry about if Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood takes power. On Thursday, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said in testimony to the House Intelligence Committee that the Muslim Brotherhood “is an umbrella term for a variety of movements, in the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence and has decried al Qaeda as a perversion of Islam.” He added that they “have pursued social ends, a betterment of the political order in Egypt, et cetera.” Nothing to worry about according to the intelligence chief, just a public spirited band of community organizers. - Washington Times Editorial 2/11/11.

Clapper's gaffes equal those of Janet Napolitano and Joe Biden. Photo: Newsbusters

The intelligence community has to do a better job collecting information that will predict uprisings like those going on in Egypt, while also treating cybersecurity as the next battlefield, CIA Director Leon E. Panetta told the same congressional committee yesterday.

Panetta, a former Clinton Administration operative, told members of the House Intelligence Committee that the CIA filed nearly 400 reports last year describing the potential for disruption in the Middle East, but needs better collection “when it comes to triggers that ignite these conditions and cause the events that we’ve seen take place.

Panetta said Friday — following the resignation of Egypt’s president — that he has established a 35-member task force to focus specifically on the types of trigger points that led to unrest in Egypt and could happen in similar situations to be ready for problems when they occur.

One intelligence officer told the Law Enforcement Examiner that this is a classic case of “closing the barn door after the horses have escaped.”

How did the world’s largest intelligence community become so impotent?

“There are many reasons for our intelligence failure including relying more on technology and less on human intelligence over the years,” claims former NYPD detective and military intelligence officer Mike Snopes.

He also points to several monumental events under both Presidents Clinton and Obama — although President Bush did little to correct the deficiencies that existed within US intelligence agencies.

For example in 1995, President Bill Clinton composed and signed an executive order prohibiting CIA officers from utilizing “unsavory characters” as informants? In other words, while gathering information or undergoing covert operations, intelligence officers overseas could not develop “assets” who were themselves terrorists, gunrunners, drug traffickers, organized crime gang leaders and members, or other denizens of the international underworld.

Besides Clinton, who was behind such obvious lunacy? It was then-Congressman Bob Torricelli (D-NJ), who prior to capturing a seat in the U.S.

Seems there needs to be someone to blame the Egypt situation on here in the United States. The Democrats are not about to turn on themselves and blame Obama so they decided the CIA should take the blame. Maybe the CIA should. Maybe they shouldn’t. The CIA didn’t do Bush any favors with the whole weapons of mass destruction deal in Iraq, but he had to sit in the shit regardless. Obama should have to do the same. This is his administration. If in fact Egypt is lost to radical Islam then Obama can suck on the blame. Seems only fair. More from Gateway Pundit via FoxNation:

The debate over who “lost” Egypt seems to have begun.

Critics are openly questioning the quality of information and analysis given to President Barack Obama by U.S. intelligence agencies in the days leading up to the dramatic uprising against Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. And they are raising questions about the effectiveness of his efforts to force the 82-year-old strongman to step down.

Administration officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, admit that some mistakes were made and some signals were missed. And, even as they frantically try to negotiate Mubarak’s departure and avert more violence, they argue that their options and leverage would have been limited even had Obama been warned long in advance of the unrest that would sweep Egypt.

Maybe the CIA did their job and Obama simply did not want to get involved. Who knows? It’s still his administration, his State Department, his responsibility. Whether this turns out good or bad it’s on him.

Although the journalist is not named in the indictment, it is believed he is New York Times reporter James Risen, who was subpoenaed to testify about his confidential sources for his book “State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration.”

A former CIA operations officer was arrested today. Photo: NACOP

In a criminal case that is beginning to rock the Washington, DC-based intelligence community, a former Central Intelligence Agency officer was arrested today on charges that he illegally disclosed national defense information and obstructed justice  The former operations officer was taken into federal custody in St. Louis and is expected to made his initial appearance this afternoon before Judge Terry I. Adelman in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.

Jeffrey Alexander Sterling is charged in a 10-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia.  Sterling, 43, is charged with six counts of unauthorized disclosure of national defense information, and one count each of unlawful retention of national defense information, mail fraud, unauthorized conveyance of government property and obstruction of justice.

According to the indictment, Sterling was employed by the CIA from May 1993 to January 2002.  From November 1998 through May 2000, he was assigned to a classified clandestine operational program designed to conduct intelligence activities related to the weapons capabilities of certain countries.

During that same time frame, he was also the operations officer assigned to handle a human asset associated with that program.  According to the indictment, Sterling was reassigned in May 2000, at which time he was no longer authorized to receive or possess classified documents concerning the program or the asset (or informant).

In connection with his employment, the indictment alleges that Sterling, who is an attorney, signed various security, secrecy and non-disclosure agreements in which he agreed never to disclose classified information to unauthorized persons, acknowledged that classified information was the property of the CIA, and also acknowledged that the unauthorized disclosure of classified information could constitute a criminal offense.

According to the indictment, these agreements also provided the suspect with the proper procedures to follow if Sterling had concerns that the CIA had engaged in any “unlawful or improper” conduct that implicated classified information.  These procedures permit such concerns to be addressed while still protecting the classified nature of the information.  The media, according to the indictment, was not an authorized party to receive such classified information under such circumstances.

The indictment alleges that Sterling, in retaliation for the CIA’s refusal to settle on terms favorable to him in the civil and administrative claims he was pursuing against the CIA, engaged in a scheme to disclose information concerning the classified operational program and the human asset – first, in connection with a possible newspaper story to be written by an author employed by a national newspaper in early 2003 and, later, in connection with a book published by the author in January 2006.