[onerifle]

Between the 9/11 commission, it's expected "recommendations" (assuming they can get past the partisan sniping), and the public's (sheeple's) need to be "protected"-

How long before the F.B.I. is allowed to "take the gloves off", so to speak, and is officially split into two units, one for criminal investigation, and one specifically for domestic intelligence, or.........an entirely new domestic intelligence organization?

I'm assuming portions of The Patriot Act would expedite things, should they move in that direction...

[spartacus2002]

Just what we need to fix the problems of the ponderous bureaucracy... another ponderous bureaucracy...

I imagine it won't be much longer til your prediction comes true. My G-d, we already have the most Orwellian-named institution Americans thought we'd never have-- Dept of Homeland Security.

[rich2u]

yeah ponderous is the problem. But if we don't do something how are we to stop these aholes?

[Mulliga]

yeah ponderous is the problem. But if we don't do something how are we to stop these aholes?

Armed pilots. Armed citizens. Stop messing around in places we don't belong and stop doling out foreign welfare.

[Justin]

I have a rock that I carry with me everywhere.

It keeps tigers from attacking me. After all, if no tigers have attacked me while I carry my rock, then it must keep all those ferocious tigers at bay.

I think everyone should have a rock of tiger warding.

The worst reason one can give for taking action is the old standby of 'Well, we have to do something.'

[onerifle]

The worst reason one can give for taking action is the old standby of 'Well, we have to do something.'

Agreed.

My concern is that there is an undercurrent of sentiment that will accept virtually anything if it is sold as "making us safer". Despite my reservations regarding the Patriot Act, I'm much more concerned with it being abused down the road- say by Hillary Clinton as AG...?

I would feel the same way if we eventually establish our version of the Brits' MI5.

[patentnonsense]

That happened in about 1933.

[7.62FullMetalJacket]

The Federal Bureau if Inertia was a lean, mean crime fighting machine early on (let's just ignore the bad stuff for now). Say what you want, but the FBI was quite effective in its youth. As with any bureaucracy, it becomes strangled by its own inertia. Furthermore, the FBI really can only react after the fact.

Does an "MI-5-like" agency scare me. Of course. Can it be made safe but get the job done? Probably. Will it fill the breech concerning domestic intelligence? Probably. It must remain on a leash. And it must sunset.

Is it worth considering? YMMV

[onerifle]

Can it be made safe but get the job done? Probably. Will it fill the breech concerning domestic intelligence? Probably. It must remain on a leash. And it must sunset.

Great idea. Perhaps we'll see if sunset clauses really work, come September.

For the life of me, though- I cannot recall of a single Federal agency that ever closed shop, once it started nursing off the people. I may very well be wrong- I just can't think of one.

[7.62FullMetalJacket]

I am sure there have been some closed government agencies, like the Horse and Buggy Dept. or the Ice House Watchdog. If the sunset was tied to the end on the WOT, then fine. Definitions: the devil is in the details. The key to sunsets is that they must be reauthorized. I think all laws should be that way. Tie congress in knots.

[Standing Wolf]

(assuming they can get past the partisan sniping)

Yep—and it's going to snow on Independence Day in Little Rock, too.

[HBK]

I thought the CIA was our MI5? :confused: Or MI6?

[riverdog]

CIA is supposedly prohibited from domestic intelligence/collecting on US citizens. But these days with an intel operation starting in foreign lands and then coming here, a single organization would make sense for continuity. Working relationships in which the CIA would hand-off a target to the FBI once the target gets here looks good on paper but doesn't seem to work in practice.

The FBI is primarily a law enforcement organization not an intelligence agency. They are looking to collect evidence to use in court -- 4th and 5th Amendments are germane. An intel organization might not be interested in prosecuting a case in court, but simply stopping a hostile action. The method of stopping the hostile action could make a court case moot.

I would like for the folks who are doing this job to have less restriction when targeting a foreign national from overseas into the U.S. What we don't need to do is throw roadblocks in front of folks who are trying to prevent the next 9/11. It's probably a lot more streamlined than it was, but a single agency able to to their job on either side of our own border makes sense. Why sunset? It is going to be an ongoing problem.

[45 ACP]

Power given is power never returned....

...or in this case, FUNDING given is FUNDING never returned....

[Chuck Jennings]

Reminds me of a Ronald Reagan quote:

No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!

[LD]

Riverdog is correct that the CIA is barred by law (wink, wink) from conducting internal domestic intelligence activities. However, as far as I know several other intelligence agencies are NOT thus restricted. I'm talking about the NSA, NRO, Defense Intelligence Service, etc. Given the size, power and capabilities of these agencies I'm wondering why nobody is asking why these folks aren't being tasked with detecting and investigating terrorist cells and or threats.

From a historical context we don't want an MI5 model constructed from ANY part of either the FBI or the CIA. Name me one operation that the CIA hasn't screwed-the-pooch on. A real good example of how inept the FBI has become can be found in Peter Lance's book, 1000 Years For Revenge: International Terrorism and The FBI. Heck, just prior to 9/11 the FBI was in trouble for losing several hundred weapons and several dozen laptop computers with investigative material on them. Anybody remember that one? We don't even want to go down the road of discussing the "threats" they uncovered in a couple of places named Ruby Ridge and Waco.

And people actually WANT to give these people more authority and freedom to collect domestic intelligence?????

I have a radical idea here ladies and gentlemen. Rather than create yet another bureaucracy, how about we hold the agencies that we already have accountable for doing their job and doing it CORRECTLY?

[Cool Hand Luke 22:36]

Riverdog is correct that the CIA is barred by law (wink, wink) from conducting internal domestic intelligence activities. However, as far as I know several other intelligence agencies are NOT thus restricted. I'm talking about the NSA, NRO, Defense Intelligence Service, etc.

There's not much to stop them from asking the Intel service of a friendly country to conduct operations in the US on their behalf.

However, as far as I know several other intelligence agencies are NOT thus restricted. I'm talking about the NSA, NRO, Defense Intelligence Service, etc. Given the size, power and capabilities of these agencies I'm wondering why nobody is asking why these folks aren't being tasked with detecting and investigating terrorist cells and or threats.

Apart from DIA, the others do not have much in the way of human inteligence capabilities. NSA for example, is far and away the best electronics eavesdropping outfit in the world, but doesn't have much field operational capability AFAIK.

Off Topic but the movie "Enemy of the State" which had NSA folks running around like ninjas was pretty far fetched but still a great flick (with Gene Hackman and Will Smith).

[buzz_knox]

Anybody remember that one? We don't even want to go down the road of discussing the "threats" they uncovered in a couple of places named Ruby Ridge and Waco.

Those started as ATF operations, not FBI. The Bureau got called in because of the "assault" on federal agents and the perceived need for HRT.

[Iain]

I thought the FBI did this stuff already. The Aug 6th PDB discusses over seventy FBI investigations into potential terrorist activity in the US.

I think you mean MI6 anyway, but I'm never sure. MI6 seems to have taken on the drug war in recent years along with Customs and Excise. The problem with these things is often the multi-agency nature of any investigation - say a large drug-smuggling ring, MI6 could be involved as could Customs as could the Police. Do we want a large structure that deals with all this instead? No thanks.

[Master Blaster]

NSA, DEA, Secret Service, ATF, FBI, CIA, DIA, INA,

ALL police or security agencies how many other federal police agencies do we need???

Does anyone know the full scope of what these folks do?????

Wouldnt sharing information cover it???

[buzz_knox]

Wouldnt sharing information cover it???

Yes, but until the Patriot Act came along, that was largely prohibited between the intel branches and the anti-crime branches.

[Gewehr98]

CIA is supposedly prohibited from domestic intelligence/collecting on US citizens.

They aren't prohibited, but legally, they have to jump through a tremendous amount of hoops to collect on U.S. citizens, under the rules of the U.S. Intelligence Oversight Program. The legal hoops are in place to prevent abuses, as witnessed during the McCarthy era. ;)

[kbr80]

How long before the U.S. has it's own version of MI5?


We already have too many:cuss:


The US version of MI5 has been around for a long time.:cuss:

[sm]

Paging Wally Malvone...

[Apologies to Travis McGee and EFAD...wait - maybe I shouldn't apologize just give credit] where credit is due :)