LOS ANGELES - Democrat John Kerry (news - web sites) outlined his plan to combat terrorism Friday that relies on stronger intelligence-gathering, law enforcement and international alliances, rebutting increasing criticism of his national security credentials from President Bush (news - web sites)'s campaign.



http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=4&u=/ap/20040227/ap_on_el_pr/democrats_33

that relies on stronger intelligence-gathering

Hilarious. From the guy that has spent his career attacking and defunding the CIA.

Based on the preformance of the CIA over the past 4 years it appears with good reason. Someone should be fired for the mess in intel and that should be the head of the CIA and his Boss. Cause doesnt the buck stop there.

Based on the preformance of the CIA over the past 4 years it appears with good reason.

Yes, well when you defund and deball the CIA in the manner that these guys did we should very well expect what we got.




Someone should be fired for the mess in intel and that should be the head of the CIA and his Boss. Cause doesnt the buck stop there.

Yeah. Howabout Kerry, Torticelli, and Clinton who spent the 90's undermining, underfunding and attacking the CIA.

I really dont think the failure of the Intel services had anything to do with dollars but rather leadership and reliance on technology. For years Intel profesionals have been warning us that looking at an object from a multibillion dollar sattilite system isnt good enough. They have said time and again that the Mark 1 eyeball is needed and a shortage of Humint (Human intel) is what was needed. That isnt a money issue its one of doing it differently and spending resources on recruitment. It is easy to sit in an office in DC and run a procurement program its way harder (and ultimately cheaper) to recruit agents to provide first person intel. The only human intel the CIA seems to rely on is defectors who will tell anything you want to hear.

It is a management issue not a budgetary issue here. The biggest corporation witht he biggest budget can fail if they do not manage their resources properly and that is the case with the CIA for example. Look at the severe shortage of Arabic speakers for example here we have a situation where there are thousands trained in Calif to speak russian when the threat is from Arabic speakers. Its planning and Management not $$$.

I really dont think the failure of the Intel services had anything to do with dollars but rather leadership and reliance on technology. For years Intel profesionals have been warning us that looking at an object from a multibillion dollar sattilite system isnt good enough. They have said time and again that the Mark 1 eyeball is needed and a shortage of Humint (Human intel) is what was needed. That isnt a money issue its one of doing it differently and spending resources on recruitment. It is easy to sit in an office in DC and run a procurement program its way harder (and ultimately cheaper) to recruit agents to provide first person intel. The only human intel the CIA seems to rely on is defectors who will tell anything you want to hear.


Thank You. You have validated what I have been saying all along.

Who do you think it was that started this nonsensical idea of removing human intelligence?

Who passed ridiculous laws that prevented the CIA from talking to unsavory operatives?