Break Up the CIA (IV)?

Interesting discussion of this question in Slate.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Break Up the CIA (IV)?

  1. Andrew Smith says:

    Judge Posner, I’ve really enjoyed reading your posts on the Lessig blog. Do you have your own blog? Will you start one? 🙂

  2. Tom Holsinger says:

    Amy Zegart, author of _Flawed by Design – Evolution of the CIA, JCS and NSC_, vehemently disagrees with Fred Kaplan’s article in Slate. Here are her statements emailed to Daniel Drezner (they were in grad school together) and quoted on Daniel Drezner’s blog:

    “I think it’s safe to say that intelligence reform expert Amy Zegart really dislikes Fred Kaplan’s take. She e-mailed me the following reaction:

    “I am, as my four-year old would put it, “steaming mad.” Where to begin? First, anyone who has spent 5 seconds with Pat Roberts (and I spent 3 hours in front of him last week) knows he’s deadly serious about reform. Where has Fred Kaplan been? Has he read the 500+ page Senate Intelligence Committee report Roberts’ committee wrote in July about WMD in Iraq and the pathological deficiencies in the IC that led to it? Does he think this report descended like manna from heaven or does he realize the Committee’s expert staff spent, oh I don’t know, a year on it? I have anextra copy; perhaps I should send it to him.

    Second, Kaplan forgets conveniently the fact that 2 of the key ideas in this proposal –splitting the CIA’s clandestine side from its analytical side and creating a new national intelligence director — were EXACTLY the same as a proposal made 12 years ago by David Boren and David McCurdy, the Democratic chairmen of the Senate and House intelligence committees. Then there is the substance of his claims. There are many valid concerns about this proposal, but Kaplan does not raise them.”

    The URL for this is:

  3. Anonymous says:

    I suppose an “intelligence reform expert” is about as useful as a high school counselor or Ted Kennedy’s liver. How does a group that is allowed to operate in secrecy with essentially zero accountability ever get reformed? History clearly shows us that it doesn’t.

  4. Raoul says:

    “. . . about WMD in Iraq and the pathological deficiencies in the IC that led to it?”

    The source of the pathological deficiencies was the White House not the IC. If there is to be any reform, it needs to be focused on insulating the IC from political influence. Particularly, influence from oil industry executives. It�s not called black gold for nothing. It’s tantamount to free money and the flust in men it produces is unmatched.

  5. Steve Rhodes says:

    Judge Posner’s review
    of the 9/11 Commission Report in the Sunday NYT Book Review is now online.

Leave a Reply