The CIA shoud be renamed SLICC


"The CIA’s own assessments of the program have been viewed with suspicion by some at the White House, officials said. “Does it make any sense that the people who are totally invested in this program . . . are the same people who are writing analyses of the Syrian opposition on which decisions are based on the future of that program?” the first U.S. official said.

Amid the setbacks in Syria in recent months, key figures in the administration have advocated prioritizing the fight against the Islamic State, rather than against the Assad government. But agency officials disagree with this rationale, saying that the Islamic State can’t be eradicated until a new government emerges capable of controlling the terrorist group’s territory in Raqqa and elsewhere."


Just to get things straight – the CIA is now by law the "National Clandestine Service." It pursues information using human agents (mostly by liaison) and it executes presidential policy in covert actions authorized by presidential "findings."  All of this is accomplished by the Directorate of Operations (DO)

Since the US IC re-structuring during the Bush Administration, the CIA no longer has a significant internal analytic body independent of the Directorate of Operations (the spies and covert operators).

The independent analysts in the IC are in DIA and State-INR and the work products reflect that.

The analysts they do have at CIA all essentially work for the DO, the people who run covert action and presumably favor the programs.

Therefore, it can be seen that as the person quoted underlined above asserted, the CIA is essentially a "Self Licking Ice Cream Cone."  (SLICC).  pl

This entry was posted in As The Borg Turns, Borg Wars, Middle East, Syria. Bookmark the permalink.

35 Responses to The CIA shoud be renamed SLICC

  1. Bill Herschel says:

    Abolish it.

  2. Jack says:

    The SLICC must be thrilled no end that the Borg Queen will likely be at the WH in the new year. What better SLICC program than regime change against that “thug” Putin??

  3. Laguerre says:

    Not being an American, I wouldn’t claim any knowledge, but I was surprised you didn’t mention that Obama has lost control of his administration, which seems obvious to us the other side of the pond.

  4. turcopolier says:

    He has not altogether lost control of it as is evidenced by this struggle within the administration in which he is reported to have a controlling opinion. pl

  5. Castellio says:

    Can you tell us how and why its obvious?

  6. Sam Peralta says:

    When a serious national security analyst, who I believe Col. Lang knows personally, is concerned, we should be too!
    “What is alarming about this discussion is that the main proponents of provoking a brawl with Russia are Hillary Clinton and her national security advisors, which includes David Petraeus.
    America appears to be on a path of self-destruction. That is especially true if Hillary is elected. We have seen during her tenure as Secretary of State that her “policy instincts” are terribly flawed. She promoted disaster after disaster with the Arab Spring the Libya intervention and the Syrian civil war. I fear for the future of our nation.”
    Of course the Hillary supporters dismiss any such concerns, since Hillary is known to have better intellect and will be a seasoned C-in-C in their viewpoint.

  7. Ex-PFC Chuck says:

    Allen Dulles must be having orgasms in his grave. According to Tim Weiner in “Legacy of Ashes” Dulles would sometimes weigh an anaylitical report in the presence of its author and sarcastically commend him or her on the basis of the result. Operations rules!

  8. Kooshy says:

    Is that to claim, Obama is not responsible for the decisions or errors made under his administration? Or on the other side of the pond, you belive he is a puppet of the system and he is not allowed to make decisions, or is he, so ignorant that prefers to play golf and don’t care what decision are made under his name. I personally think he makes decisissions on bad advise that he wants to hear, and he is scared of making decision outside of what the borg feeds him. He, IMO is a perfect candidate for Borg. So is HRC.

  9. VietnamVet says:

    There is a hybrid war ongoing with Russia with battles underway in the Ukraine and Syria. The intent is regime change in the Kremlin. One can acknowledge that this is reality since it explains that the continued arming of Jihadists in Syria is to get Russia stuck in an endless quagmire while trying to retake Mosul from Jihadists in Iraq at the same time. One may not be aware that a new Cold War has started with Russia. They only watch corporate media. The third possibility that I have run into with response to my apocalyptic comments is denial that a shooting war between NATO and Russia will escalate. No leader is so insane to start a nuclear war that would kill them and exterminate mankind.
    I am guessing that instead of lifting the rock to look at the creepy crawlers underneath; President Barrack Obama is looking ahead to a bright future of raking in millions between golf games. Hillary Clinton is one of the creepy crawlers.

  10. Keith Harbaugh says:

    “Since the US IC re-structuring during the Bush Administration,
    the CIA no longer has an internal analytic body independent of
    the Directorate of Operations (the spies and covert operators).”

    Surely such a significant change to the IC would have generated,
    both before and after it was implemented, analyses of its pros and cons.
    Can anyone here cite where such an Analysis of Alternatives has been published in the open literature?

  11. The atrophy of independent analysis in the CIA can be traced to rapid rise of the Counterterrorism Center (CTC) after 9/11. The CTC always had analysts sitting with the operations personnel and reports officers. It wasn’t a bad idea. Originally it did not replace anything in the Directorate of Analysis. After 9/11, the focus throughout the IC was to provide “actionable intelligence” to JSOC, the expanded SAD and the rest of DOD. The mantra at CIA became “Capture-Kill” to the detriment of any long term strategic analysis.
    When Brennan took over the CIA, he reorganized the Agency on the CTC model. He established ten or so mission centers within the DO with a large number of analysts consumed by these new mission centers. The Directorate of Analysis became a shell of its former self.
    This did not happen in the DIA. There was a much closer relationship between operations and analysis, but analysis did not become subservient to operations. Perhaps it was by design. Perhaps it was the personalities involved. Perhaps it was sheer dumb luck. I think it was a combination of all three.

  12. Earthrise says:

    Can I ask SST for some assistance?
    Paul Craig Roberts, some of you and others in the Alt Media space have complained that Russia showed weakness and made an error in instituting the two Syrian ceasefires (and the pause recently). I am of the opinion that the Russians are playing the propaganda game superbly, using their experience with RT to perfection. Russia can’t/won’t win an conventional war in Syria, they have stated they will not die in a ditch in the Levant. Managing international opinion is key to their eventual success. And if the recent moves by Natwest in Britain are any indicator, it is working.
    By Cooperating With Washington On Syria Russia Walked Into A Trap — Paul Craig Roberts
    Who is right?

  13. Cortes says:

    Regrettably SLICC transit gloria mundi.

  14. Babak Makkinejad says:

    Russia changed the strategic situation in the Levant with 24 air crafts.
    NATO states, Israel, and Gulfies together probably have 100 times as many aircrafts in that theatre or near it.
    (How many aircraft does France alone have in one of those Gulfie states; protecting them against the 10-foot tall Iranians?)
    It is not Russia that cannot or won’t win; it is that entire NATO+Israel+Gulfies.

  15. This is a bit of a tangent, but it’s interesting to note that Evan McMullin (the temporarily ex-Republican “independent” presidential candidate who might just win Utah’s electoral college votes) came out of the CTC side of the CIA, before working at Goldman Sachs and then serving as a defense policy staffer for House Republicans. Explains a lot about his Syrian world view (and why he’s such a heartthrob with the few Neocons who aren’t voting for Hillary this year).
    But as I said, that’s really tangential to your point.

  16. J says:

    The SLICC keeps melting

  17. Earthrise says:

    Nice, though I don’t see the dissolution of the CIA to be such the tragedy.

  18. readerOfTeaLeaves says:

    “But agency officials disagree with this rationale, saying that the Islamic State can’t be eradicated until a new government emerges capable of controlling the terrorist group’s territory in Raqqa and elsewhere…”
    Sounds like something right out of a graduate seminar.
    The best laid plans.
    Along with ‘paved with good intentions…’

  19. turcopolier says:

    Keith Harbaugh
    I doubt that there is a document like that. The re-structuring was a contact sport played in the Washington arena among the agency heads with G Bush as a reluctant referee who actually did not want to re-structure the government at all. His hand was forced in this by the media generated firestorm over “connecting the dots.” pl

  20. LeaNder says:

    nitwit comment: Pat has alluded to bits and pieces over the years in many different contexts, but yes, it is hard to wrap your head around it without experienced knowledge.
    I may be wrong, but in this context I seem to vaguely recall centers of operation acting pretty independently. That may or may not be related to the ‘contact’/analysis/activities ‘circle’ he underlined above.
    There always was a partial overlap between military and the CIA. But now they seem to be acting pretty independently. What I would like to know is if with or without support from SF of the army …advisers, trainers … and who controls the program. The CIA only? This could explain dissent from DIA sectors, I seem to recall.
    There is a recent book by
    I could imagine that the idea of a political scientist writing on the IC from Pat’s perspective isn’t the ideal choice.
    Pat’s own book covers the HUMINT aspect which seems to be part of ‘the circle’, to the extend I understand.

  21. turcopolier says:

    “The Directorate of Analysis became a shell of its former self.” It still exists? It seems invisible. pl

  22. turcopolier says:

    I don’t understand any of that. pl

  23. kooshy says:

    Sorry for OT.
    I just heard over at CNN, that Obama care premiums will go up an average of 25% this year some states like Arizona will experience up to 100% increase. What a great Idea that was, Mr. Obama should be ashamed of himself.

  24. LeaNder says:

    that’s why I wrote nitwit comment, Pat.
    I record this as a polite way to send me back and do my homework, or stop babbling. “Don’t understand you”, is a familiar complaint. 😉
    Vague memory traces without the least mental abilities, leave alone experienced knowledge that could establish a firmer basis for more random allusions, e.g. intelligence Centers:

  25. Procopius says:

    I have had the impression there is a civil war going on in the Deep State. It seems as though occasionally Obama is able to nudge things toward the vision he makes speeches about, and then in a day or to it’s back to regime change in Moscow. If true, this would also help explain the apparent lack of any coherent goals that make sense (or make sense to me, I should say). Of course I may misunderstand which direction is the one he wants to go.

  26. pl,
    It still exists as an organization, but I think it’s more of a headquarters company for the analysts in the mission centers.

  27. Fred says:

    creative destruction just like was done to the social safety nets in the former USSR.

  28. Kooshy says:

    Fred- As an example of the disaster, a small printing compony ever since 80s is paying 50% of the employees health insurance cost. The compony due to its number of employees, is not required by law to provide health insurance. Ever since Obama care 3 employees have dropped out of the plan because they truly can’t afford thier 50% of the cost.

  29. Fred says:

    I’m sure HilaryCare! will do the same thing to Social Security.

  30. madmamie says:

    Ditto Kooshy…As someone who lives on BOTH sides of the pond I totally agree with your analysis. I would only add that Obama also has a driving need to be accepted by the existing oligarchy and was never going to let a few slaughtered women and children keep him from achieving that goal. He probably doesn’t give a damn who makes the decisions as long as he doesn’t get blamed for the bad ones. He’s eager to become another ex-pres living off the fat of the land with his name on a library and lots of time to play golf.

  31. Bill H says:

    Mr. Obama is quite proud of himself because Obamacare is doing precisely what it was designed to do; it is making profits for the healthcare industry.

  32. Babak Makkinejad says:

    Not to try to put lipstick on a pig, however, he did sign that Cease Fire deal with Iran – called JCPOA.
    Of course, if he had very strong backing from his Barons in EU and his vassals in the Middle East, he could have conceivably signed a peace treaty with Iran rather than a temporary cease-fire.

  33. Cee says:

    Hopefully they’ll soon be nothing but a small puddle. Scoundrels.
    FBI Agent: The CIA Could Have Stopped 9/11
    Mark Rossini, a former FBI special agent at the center of an enduring mystery related to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, says he is “appalled” by the newly declassified statements by former CIA Director George Tenet defending the spy agency’s efforts to detect and stop the plot.
    Rossini, who was assigned to the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center (CTC) at the time of the attacks, has long maintained that the U.S. government has covered up secret relations between the spy agency and Saudi individuals who may have abetted the plot. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers who flew commercial airliners into the World Trade Center towers, the Pentagon, and a failed effort to crash into the U.S. Capitol, were Saudis.
    Mike Springman- The former head of the American visa bureau in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia blows the whistle on the 9/11 hijackers.
    Springman went public (after internal efforts failed) to expose the State Dept/CIA conduiting terrorists into the US
    BBC News Source: “former head of the American visa bureau in Jeddah is Michael Springman”.
    BBC News | NEWSNIGHT | Greg Palest report transcript – 6/11/01
    Thirteen of the 15 Saudi hijackers were issued visas to the United States, 10 of them at the US Consulate in Jeddah, according to US officials.…dge/part1.shtml
    Officials told to ‘back off’ on Saudis and Bin Laden before September 11
    FBI claims Bin Laden inquiry was frustrated | World news | The Guardian
    CBC News transcript- Michael Springman
    “this operation in Jeddah was so peculiar, so strange, and it went against anything I had ever seen or heard in my 20 years in government, that I thought that what these people were telling me about CIA involvement with Osama, and with Afghanistan had to be true because nothing else would fit. By the attempts to cover me up and shut me down, this convinced me more and more that this was not a pipe-dream, this was not a machination, this was not a conspiracy theory.”

  34. mike allen says:

    “Officials told to ‘back off’ on Saudis and Bin Laden before September 11”
    True! It came from the Bush whitehouse. It goes back to the 2nd Bush/Gore debate on 11 October 2000. Question by moderator Jim Lehrer was regarding “police profiling” on blacks and hispanics. Bush turned it completely around complaining about profiling of Arabs at airports and elsewhere. Said he would stop that when elected. He was pandering to the Arab-American vote hoping to overturn Democratic advantage in Michigan, California and southern New England. Plus he had big bucks from his Saudi friends whitewashed through various PACs.

  35. Harry says:
    It can be hard to find news reports with good provenance which give some clarity on what is happening in syria. The newspapers generally give the government line. I found this report very helpful.

Comments are closed.