Huge Fly Swatter, No Flies: Top Secret America's Vast Counterterrorism Machine | The Nation

Blogs > The Dreyfuss Report

The Dreyfuss Report

Huge Fly Swatter, No Flies: Top Secret America's Vast Counterterrorism Machine

  • Share
  • |
  • |
  • StumbleUpon.com
  • |
  • Recommended by 0
  • |
  • Text Size A | A | A

Not surprisingly, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence is complaining about the Washington Post's blockbuster series, "Top Secret America," whose first installment appeared today. (You can read the whole series, as it appears, at the Post's special site, TopSecretAmerica.com.) Laughably, the ODNI says:

About the Author

Robert Dreyfuss
Robert Dreyfuss, a Nation contributing editor, is an investigative journalist in Alexandria, Virginia, specializing in...

Also by The Author

President Obama has pledged to get the rest of US forces out of Iraq in 2011. But Iraq is still unstable and politically explosive, and it is increasingly in Iran's orbit. All that may cause Obama to reconsider his plans to pull out.

American troop strength in Iraq is declining, meaning that the US influence is declining, too. More than ever, the United States needs an understanding with Iran on keeping Iraq whole and violence-free.

The reporting does not reflect the Intelligence Community we know.… We have reformed the [intelligence community] in ways that have improved the quality, quantity, regularity, and speed of our support to policymakers, warfighters, and homeland defenders, and we will continue our reform efforts.  We provide oversight, while also encouraging initiative.  We work constantly to reduce inefficiencies and redundancies, while preserving a degree of intentional overlap among agencies to strengthen analysis, challenge conventional thinking, and eliminate single points of failure.

But as the Post makes clear, the world of Top Secret America has grown like Topsy Secret America. Dana Priest and William M. Arkin, who wrote the series, report that the post-9/11 apparatus has exploded to include at least 1,271 government organizations and nearly 2,000 private contractors in 10,000 locations, with 854,000 people holding top-secret security clearances. The intelligence budget for the United States has risen from $30 billion a year in 2001 to $75 billion today, and that only scratches the surface. And they report:

Twenty-four organizations were created by the end of 2001, including the Office of Homeland Security and the Foreign Terrorist Asset Tracking Force. In 2002, 37 more were created to track weapons of mass destruction, collect threat tips and coordinate the new focus on counterterrorism. That was followed the next year by 36 new organizations, and 26 after that; and 31 more, and 32 more, and 20 or more each in 2007, 2008, and 2009.

What's missing from the story, however, is any assessment of the threat against which this vast and growing machinery is arrayed. The Post notes that twenty-five separate agencies have been set up to track terrorist financing, which admirably shows the overlapping and redundant nature of the post-9/11 ballooning of agencies and organizations targeting terrorism. But the article barely mentions that there are hardly any terrorists to track.

The Post points out that among the recent, nuisance-level attacks by Muslim extremists—the Fort Hood shooter, the underwear bomber, the Times Square incident—the intelligence machine failed to detect or stop them. True. That's an indictment of the counterterrorism machinery that has become a staple for critics of the outsize budgets and wasteful bureaucracy that has been created since 9/11.

The core problem, which the Post doesn't address, is that Al Qaeda and its affiliates, its sympathizers, and even self-starting terrorist actors who aren't part of Al Qaeda itself, are a tiny and manageable problem. Yet the apparatus that has been created is designed to meet nothing less than an existential threat. Even at the height of the cold war, when the Soviet Union and its allies were engaged in a brutal, country-by-country battle across Asia, Africa and Latin America to combat the United States, NATO, and American hegemonism, there was nothing like the post-9/11 behemoth in existence. A thousand smart intelligence analysts, a thousand smart FBI and law enforcement officers, and a few hundred Special Operations military folk are all that's needed to deal with the terrorism threat. It's been hugely overblown. Yet in the Post story, sage-like gray beards of the counterterrorism machine stroke their chins and pontificate about how difficult it is to coordinate all these agencies, absorb all the data, read all the reports and absorb the 1.7 billion e-mails and phone calls that are picked up every day by the National Security Agency. It's an "Emperor's New Clothes" problem. The emperor isn't naked, but no one, really, is threatening him.

  • Share
  • |
  • |
  • StumbleUpon.com
  • |
  • Recommended by 0
  • |
  • Text Size A | A | A

If you like this article, consider making a donation.

Reprint this article. Click here for rights and information.

Comments

[ Post Your Comment ]
Showing 5 comments of 34 - next 5 ››
Current Sort: last to first
1. posted by: BigPasture at 07/21/2010 @ 11:49am

1. posted by: ibbleblibble at 07/20/2010 @ 8:26pm

Yea, thats what you get from a nation that focuses more on irrealevant HATE or the defense of our nation which is their own personal idiocy rather than facts. Never known these leftwingnuts for anything else.

2. posted by: ibbleblibble at 07/20/2010 @ 9:26pm

actually i'm getting 4.7% GDP spent on defense...

which accounts for "28% of estimated tax revenues. Including non-DOD expenditures, defense spending was approximately 25–29% of budgeted expenditures and 38–44% of estimated tax revenues. According to the Congressional Budget Office, defense spending grew 9% annually on average from fiscal year 2000–2009."

also, the US spends "almost as much as the rest of the world's defense spending combined and is over nine times larger than the military budget of China (compared at the nominal US dollar / Renminbi rate, not the PPP rate). The United States and its close allies are responsible for two-thirds to three-quarters of the world's military spending (of which, in turn, the U.S. is responsible for the majority)[27][28][29]."

http://tinyurl.com/hgc3t

so not THAT far off, RIO...

here's another interesting set of stats...

us health care spending as % of GDP 14.6%

us average lifespan - 78.2

health care spending, germany - 10.9%, life expectancy - 79.4

spending, france - 9.7%, life - 80.7

spending - sweden - 9.2%, life - 80.9

spending, COSTA RICA - 9.3%, life - 78.8

uk - 7.7, life - 79.4

cuba - 7.5, life - 78.3(!!!)

http://tinyurl.com/32r9rd

http://tinyurl.com/yvls29

wow...stats...

3. posted by: ibbleblibble at 07/20/2010 @ 4:22pm

posted by: BigPasture at 07/20/2010 @ 3:07pm
Report abusive | Ignore This User

4.03% spent on defense?

i gotta go, but SOMEBODY fact check that one, please!

4. posted by: BigPasture at 07/20/2010 @ 4:07pm

3. posted by: mnv at 07/20/2010 @ 2:17pm

National Security, the WOT are far more important than, say: the creation of the thousands of jobs necessary to absorb the more than 100,000 working age people now entering the market's labor force every month.

Suuuurrrreee, castigate the 4.03% of GDP spent on defense and concentrate on growing government to "takeover" and grow 12 to 15% of GDP for healthcare of illegals and non producers , take over industries, and maybe even banking or Wall st. that makes even more sense! (to a good socialist centralizing power and destroying freedom that is)

5. posted by: ibbleblibble at 07/20/2010 @ 3:53pm

iran. overblown bullshit boogyman justifying absurd military expenditures.

how orwellian.

Showing 5 comments of 34 - next 5 ››
Current Sort: last to first

Post Your Comments

You must be logged in to post a comment