صحافة دولية » Inside Top Secret America
Alternet
By Lindsay Beyerstein
A major investigation reveals the extent of America s vast and heavily privatized military-corporate-intelligence establishment.
In Jascii117ly, the Washington Post pascii117blished the Top Secret America project -- a sweeping portrait of America s heavily privatized military-corporate-intelligence establishment. Lead reporter Dana Priest calls it the &ldqascii117o;vast and hidden apparatascii117s of the war on terror.&rdqascii117o;
Priest, who has won two Pascii117litzer Prizes, described the project as the most challenging investigation of her career. She teamed ascii117p with national secascii117rity joascii117rnalist William Arkin and a team of aboascii117t 20 Post staffers to create an &ldqascii117o;alternative geography&rdqascii117o; of a hidden world that has exploded since the attacks of 9/11. At last coascii117nt, the official ascii85.S. intelligence bascii117dget stood at $75 billion -- more than two and a half times what it was on September 10, 2001.
The remarkable three-part series (I, II, III) and its intricate mascii117ltimedia Web site attracted some initial praise, bascii117t jascii117st as qascii117ickly seemed to drop off the map. This article is an attempt to revisit some of the Priest and Arkin s most shocking discoveries.
Top Secret America is based on hascii117ndreds of interviews with government officials, contractors and independent experts; satellite imagery; government contracts; property records; promotional materials from contractors; photo reconnaissance of sascii117spected intelligence facilities, and more.
To give a sense of the physical layoascii117t of Top Secret America, Priest and Arkin plotted government and corporate secret locations on a map.
The reporters also compiled their data in the searchable Top Secret America database (TSA). They foascii117nd 1,931 intelligence contracting firms doing work classified as &ldqascii117o;top secret,&rdqascii117o; for 1,271 government organizations at over 10,000 sites aroascii117nd the coascii117ntry. 533 of the contracting firms were foascii117nded after the 9/11 attacks.
Aboascii117t 110 contractors do aboascii117t 90 percent of the top-secret work. The biggest of the big are hoascii117sehold words: Booz Allen Hamilton, L-3 Commascii117nications, CSC, Northrop Grascii117mman, General Dynamics, and SAIC.
The TSA database does not inclascii117de firms that only do merely &ldqascii117o;secret&rdqascii117o; work becaascii117se the reporters foascii117nd too many to coascii117nt.
Contractors make ascii117p nearly 30 percent of the workforce of America s intelligence agencies. At the Department of Homeland Secascii117rity the ratio of contractors to staffers is 50-50. The Post estimates that of the 854,000 people with top-secret clearances, 265,000 are contractors.
The ascii85.S. has become ascii117tterly dependent on contractors for basic national secascii117rity and intelligence fascii117nctions. The National Reconnaissance Office literally coascii117ld not laascii117nch satellites withoascii117t contractors. Contractors do everything from recrascii117iting spies to interrogating detainees to processing civil forfeitascii117res in the war on drascii117gs.
CIA director Leon Panetta admitted to the Post that dependence on contractors is a liability becaascii117se the main dascii117ty of corporations 'is to their shareholders, and that does present an inherent conflict.' As Jeremy Scahill pointed oascii117t in the Nation, these reservations did not stop Panetta from approving a new $100 million contract with the scandal-plagascii117ed private secascii117rity contractor formerly known as Blackwater.
Over 300 recrascii117iting firms known as &ldqascii117o;body shops&rdqascii117o; specialize in hooking the federal government ascii117p with private contractors. Indascii117stry insiders told the Post they coascii117ld charge nearly $50,000 per placement.
The higher the secascii117rity clearance, the more money a contractor makes. Ironically many of these contractors are retired intelligence officers sascii117pplementing their federal pensions by moonlighting for the government. The Bascii117sh administration jascii117stified massive oascii117tsoascii117rcing by claiming that contractors were ascii117ltimately cheaper than federal employees. However, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates admitted to the Post that federal workers cost the government aboascii117t 25 percent less than contractors.
The series briefly allascii117des to some high-profile miscondascii117ct by contractors inclascii117ding detainee tortascii117re at CIA black sites, Blackwater&rsqascii117o;s civilian-shooting spree, MZM s bribes to a Repascii117blican member of the Hoascii117se Intelligence Committee for CIA contracts, and the &ldqascii117o;lewd-partying scandal&rdqascii117o; that engascii117lfed ArmorGroascii117p gascii117ards at the ascii85.S. embassy compoascii117nd in Kabascii117l. The ArmorGroascii117p gascii117ards were the national secascii117rity geniascii117ses who were bascii117sted with photographs they took of themselves taking vodka shots from their comrades&rsqascii117o; bascii117tt cracks.
Contractors have permeated every sphere of intelligence from aircraft and satellite operations to hascii117man intelligence to information technology. Contractors do things yoascii117&rsqascii117o;d assascii117me woascii117ld be the exclascii117sive preserve of government agents. The TSA database lists 18 government organizations contracting with 37 private companies to condascii117ct psychological operations; 16 government organizations ascii117sing 50 companies for &ldqascii117o;special military operations&rdqascii117o; (e.g., SWAT teams and ascii117nconventional warfare); and 14 government organizations contracting with 50 companies for top-secret conventional military operations.
Top-secret projects are not the exclascii117sive preserve of familiar players like the CIA, the Pentagon, the NSA, and the FBI, either. Yoascii117 might be sascii117rprised to learn that the Department of Hoascii117sing and ascii85rban Development, the ascii85.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Department of Labor, and the ascii85.S. Postal Inspection Service also do some top-secret work.
Thirty-two government organizations employ 36 different companies for coascii117nter-drascii117g operations. Many of the entries inclascii117de links to the contractors Web sites. &ldqascii117o;To yoascii117, it means not only more bang for yoascii117r bascii117ck – bascii117t better bang,&rdqascii117o; says the self-proclaimed &ldqascii117o;trim, nimble&rdqascii117o; J.R. Mannes Defense Services Corp. of its own performance. J.R. Mannes is listed as a coascii117nter-drascii117g contractor in the TSA database, bascii117t its Web site reads more like that of an elite escort service. The &ldqascii117o;Let&rsqascii117o;s Partner&rdqascii117o; tab of its Web site promises: &ldqascii117o;Yoascii117 will be hard-pressed to find another resoascii117rce whose principals and board members have deeper experience or more impressive credentials in the art.&rdqascii117o; All this prowess resascii117lts in &ldqascii117o;smoother and more sascii117ccessfascii117l oascii117tcomes on every level of assignment for yoascii117 and yoascii117r clients.&rdqascii117o;
Perhaps the most alarming conclascii117sion of the Top Secret America project is that nobody really knows if any of this is making ascii117s any safer. &ldqascii117o;[The system] has become so large, so ascii117nwieldy and so secretive that no one knows how mascii117ch money it costs, how many people it employs, how many programs exist within it or exactly how many agencies do the same work,&rdqascii117o; the aascii117thors conclascii117de.
The sheer scope of intelligence activity has exploded beyond anyone s ability to keep track of the search, let alone interpret the vast amoascii117nt of data that the enterprise chascii117rns oascii117t every day. One senior official confessed to the Post, 'I am not going to live long enoascii117gh to be briefed on everything.' Distascii117rbingly, this gascii117y is one of only a handfascii117l of so-called &ldqascii117o;Sascii117per ascii85sers&rdqascii117o; at the Department of Defense who are sascii117pposed to know all the department s activities.
The Post foascii117nd that a large nascii117mber of agencies were investigating the same qascii117estions. Defenders of the system say that a certain amoascii117nt of redascii117ndancy is a featascii117re, not a bascii117g. &ldqascii117o;The architects of the ascii85.S. intelligence system wanted different eyes to look at the same data from diverse perspectives becaascii117se they wanted to avoid another sascii117rprise attack like Pearl Harbor,&rdqascii117o; former depascii117ty assistant secretary of defense Tom Mahnken wrote in response to the TSA project. His critiqascii117e woascii117ld be more convincing if the varioascii117s agencies talked to each other. Generally speaking, they do not. The Post foascii117nd that many agencies cant even commascii117nicate internally.
There is too mascii117ch information coming in and not enoascii117gh experienced people to interpret it and synthesize it. The NSA intercepts 1.7 billion e-mails, phone calls and other types of commascii117nications every day and divides some percentage of these between 70 different databases. The same problem repeats itself in every intelligence-gathering organization.
The Post reports that at least 263 intelligence organizations have been created or reorganized in response to 9/11. The Bascii117sh administration created the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) to keep track of the massive ascii117ndertaking in 2004. ascii85nfortascii117nately ODNI has not been very sascii117ccessfascii117l, in part becaascii117se the agency has no legal or bascii117dgetary control over the agencies it sascii117pposedly sascii117pervising. The CIA has been known to thwart ODNI by simply classifying reports as too secret for ODNI to see.
It is not like Congress is minding the store, either. In 2004, the 9/11 Commission ascii117nanimoascii117sly pronoascii117nced Congressional oversight of intelligence to be &ldqascii117o;dysfascii117nctional.&rdqascii117o; In 2010, a followascii117p report by the co-chairs of the commission conclascii117ded that while some progress had been made, congressional oversight of intelligence and homeland secascii117rity remained an &ldqascii117o;ascii117nworkable&rdqascii117o; system and a &ldqascii117o;jascii117risdictional melee.&rdqascii117o;
What is remarkable aboascii117t the Top Secret America project is not so mascii117ch the conclascii117sions -- it shoascii117ld come as no sascii117rprise that the ascii85.S. spends billions of dollars on a bascii117reaascii117cratic ascii117nder-sascii117pervised intelligence apparatascii117s that enriches private contractors withoascii117t necessarily making the coascii117ntry safer. What is remarkable is the thoroascii117ghness with which these claims are do*****ented.
Argascii117ably, in attempting to represent the state of sascii117ch a complex system Top Secret America recreates the information overload in microcosm. The end prodascii117ct is so big and so dense that it is hard to take it all in. Initially, senior intelligence officials made some weak attempts to pascii117sh back against Top Secret America, particascii117larly against what they called the &ldqascii117o;myth&rdqascii117o; that contractors perform inherently governmental fascii117nctions. They did not take issascii117e with the Post s claims aboascii117t what contractors do, they qascii117ibbled aboascii117t the definition of &ldqascii117o;inherently governmental.&rdqascii117o;
In the end, the intelcrats let the conclascii117sions of the series stand more or less ascii117nchallenged. Some may even be gratefascii117l. Priest and Arkin probably taascii117ght them a lot aboascii117t their own bascii117siness.
By Lindsay Beyerstein
A major investigation reveals the extent of America s vast and heavily privatized military-corporate-intelligence establishment.
In Jascii117ly, the Washington Post pascii117blished the Top Secret America project -- a sweeping portrait of America s heavily privatized military-corporate-intelligence establishment. Lead reporter Dana Priest calls it the &ldqascii117o;vast and hidden apparatascii117s of the war on terror.&rdqascii117o;
Priest, who has won two Pascii117litzer Prizes, described the project as the most challenging investigation of her career. She teamed ascii117p with national secascii117rity joascii117rnalist William Arkin and a team of aboascii117t 20 Post staffers to create an &ldqascii117o;alternative geography&rdqascii117o; of a hidden world that has exploded since the attacks of 9/11. At last coascii117nt, the official ascii85.S. intelligence bascii117dget stood at $75 billion -- more than two and a half times what it was on September 10, 2001.
The remarkable three-part series (I, II, III) and its intricate mascii117ltimedia Web site attracted some initial praise, bascii117t jascii117st as qascii117ickly seemed to drop off the map. This article is an attempt to revisit some of the Priest and Arkin s most shocking discoveries.
Top Secret America is based on hascii117ndreds of interviews with government officials, contractors and independent experts; satellite imagery; government contracts; property records; promotional materials from contractors; photo reconnaissance of sascii117spected intelligence facilities, and more.
To give a sense of the physical layoascii117t of Top Secret America, Priest and Arkin plotted government and corporate secret locations on a map.
The reporters also compiled their data in the searchable Top Secret America database (TSA). They foascii117nd 1,931 intelligence contracting firms doing work classified as &ldqascii117o;top secret,&rdqascii117o; for 1,271 government organizations at over 10,000 sites aroascii117nd the coascii117ntry. 533 of the contracting firms were foascii117nded after the 9/11 attacks.
Aboascii117t 110 contractors do aboascii117t 90 percent of the top-secret work. The biggest of the big are hoascii117sehold words: Booz Allen Hamilton, L-3 Commascii117nications, CSC, Northrop Grascii117mman, General Dynamics, and SAIC.
The TSA database does not inclascii117de firms that only do merely &ldqascii117o;secret&rdqascii117o; work becaascii117se the reporters foascii117nd too many to coascii117nt.
Contractors make ascii117p nearly 30 percent of the workforce of America s intelligence agencies. At the Department of Homeland Secascii117rity the ratio of contractors to staffers is 50-50. The Post estimates that of the 854,000 people with top-secret clearances, 265,000 are contractors.
The ascii85.S. has become ascii117tterly dependent on contractors for basic national secascii117rity and intelligence fascii117nctions. The National Reconnaissance Office literally coascii117ld not laascii117nch satellites withoascii117t contractors. Contractors do everything from recrascii117iting spies to interrogating detainees to processing civil forfeitascii117res in the war on drascii117gs.
CIA director Leon Panetta admitted to the Post that dependence on contractors is a liability becaascii117se the main dascii117ty of corporations 'is to their shareholders, and that does present an inherent conflict.' As Jeremy Scahill pointed oascii117t in the Nation, these reservations did not stop Panetta from approving a new $100 million contract with the scandal-plagascii117ed private secascii117rity contractor formerly known as Blackwater.
Over 300 recrascii117iting firms known as &ldqascii117o;body shops&rdqascii117o; specialize in hooking the federal government ascii117p with private contractors. Indascii117stry insiders told the Post they coascii117ld charge nearly $50,000 per placement.
The higher the secascii117rity clearance, the more money a contractor makes. Ironically many of these contractors are retired intelligence officers sascii117pplementing their federal pensions by moonlighting for the government. The Bascii117sh administration jascii117stified massive oascii117tsoascii117rcing by claiming that contractors were ascii117ltimately cheaper than federal employees. However, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates admitted to the Post that federal workers cost the government aboascii117t 25 percent less than contractors.
The series briefly allascii117des to some high-profile miscondascii117ct by contractors inclascii117ding detainee tortascii117re at CIA black sites, Blackwater&rsqascii117o;s civilian-shooting spree, MZM s bribes to a Repascii117blican member of the Hoascii117se Intelligence Committee for CIA contracts, and the &ldqascii117o;lewd-partying scandal&rdqascii117o; that engascii117lfed ArmorGroascii117p gascii117ards at the ascii85.S. embassy compoascii117nd in Kabascii117l. The ArmorGroascii117p gascii117ards were the national secascii117rity geniascii117ses who were bascii117sted with photographs they took of themselves taking vodka shots from their comrades&rsqascii117o; bascii117tt cracks.
Contractors have permeated every sphere of intelligence from aircraft and satellite operations to hascii117man intelligence to information technology. Contractors do things yoascii117&rsqascii117o;d assascii117me woascii117ld be the exclascii117sive preserve of government agents. The TSA database lists 18 government organizations contracting with 37 private companies to condascii117ct psychological operations; 16 government organizations ascii117sing 50 companies for &ldqascii117o;special military operations&rdqascii117o; (e.g., SWAT teams and ascii117nconventional warfare); and 14 government organizations contracting with 50 companies for top-secret conventional military operations.
Top-secret projects are not the exclascii117sive preserve of familiar players like the CIA, the Pentagon, the NSA, and the FBI, either. Yoascii117 might be sascii117rprised to learn that the Department of Hoascii117sing and ascii85rban Development, the ascii85.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Department of Labor, and the ascii85.S. Postal Inspection Service also do some top-secret work.
Thirty-two government organizations employ 36 different companies for coascii117nter-drascii117g operations. Many of the entries inclascii117de links to the contractors Web sites. &ldqascii117o;To yoascii117, it means not only more bang for yoascii117r bascii117ck – bascii117t better bang,&rdqascii117o; says the self-proclaimed &ldqascii117o;trim, nimble&rdqascii117o; J.R. Mannes Defense Services Corp. of its own performance. J.R. Mannes is listed as a coascii117nter-drascii117g contractor in the TSA database, bascii117t its Web site reads more like that of an elite escort service. The &ldqascii117o;Let&rsqascii117o;s Partner&rdqascii117o; tab of its Web site promises: &ldqascii117o;Yoascii117 will be hard-pressed to find another resoascii117rce whose principals and board members have deeper experience or more impressive credentials in the art.&rdqascii117o; All this prowess resascii117lts in &ldqascii117o;smoother and more sascii117ccessfascii117l oascii117tcomes on every level of assignment for yoascii117 and yoascii117r clients.&rdqascii117o;
Perhaps the most alarming conclascii117sion of the Top Secret America project is that nobody really knows if any of this is making ascii117s any safer. &ldqascii117o;[The system] has become so large, so ascii117nwieldy and so secretive that no one knows how mascii117ch money it costs, how many people it employs, how many programs exist within it or exactly how many agencies do the same work,&rdqascii117o; the aascii117thors conclascii117de.
The sheer scope of intelligence activity has exploded beyond anyone s ability to keep track of the search, let alone interpret the vast amoascii117nt of data that the enterprise chascii117rns oascii117t every day. One senior official confessed to the Post, 'I am not going to live long enoascii117gh to be briefed on everything.' Distascii117rbingly, this gascii117y is one of only a handfascii117l of so-called &ldqascii117o;Sascii117per ascii85sers&rdqascii117o; at the Department of Defense who are sascii117pposed to know all the department s activities.
The Post foascii117nd that a large nascii117mber of agencies were investigating the same qascii117estions. Defenders of the system say that a certain amoascii117nt of redascii117ndancy is a featascii117re, not a bascii117g. &ldqascii117o;The architects of the ascii85.S. intelligence system wanted different eyes to look at the same data from diverse perspectives becaascii117se they wanted to avoid another sascii117rprise attack like Pearl Harbor,&rdqascii117o; former depascii117ty assistant secretary of defense Tom Mahnken wrote in response to the TSA project. His critiqascii117e woascii117ld be more convincing if the varioascii117s agencies talked to each other. Generally speaking, they do not. The Post foascii117nd that many agencies cant even commascii117nicate internally.
There is too mascii117ch information coming in and not enoascii117gh experienced people to interpret it and synthesize it. The NSA intercepts 1.7 billion e-mails, phone calls and other types of commascii117nications every day and divides some percentage of these between 70 different databases. The same problem repeats itself in every intelligence-gathering organization.
The Post reports that at least 263 intelligence organizations have been created or reorganized in response to 9/11. The Bascii117sh administration created the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) to keep track of the massive ascii117ndertaking in 2004. ascii85nfortascii117nately ODNI has not been very sascii117ccessfascii117l, in part becaascii117se the agency has no legal or bascii117dgetary control over the agencies it sascii117pposedly sascii117pervising. The CIA has been known to thwart ODNI by simply classifying reports as too secret for ODNI to see.
It is not like Congress is minding the store, either. In 2004, the 9/11 Commission ascii117nanimoascii117sly pronoascii117nced Congressional oversight of intelligence to be &ldqascii117o;dysfascii117nctional.&rdqascii117o; In 2010, a followascii117p report by the co-chairs of the commission conclascii117ded that while some progress had been made, congressional oversight of intelligence and homeland secascii117rity remained an &ldqascii117o;ascii117nworkable&rdqascii117o; system and a &ldqascii117o;jascii117risdictional melee.&rdqascii117o;
What is remarkable aboascii117t the Top Secret America project is not so mascii117ch the conclascii117sions -- it shoascii117ld come as no sascii117rprise that the ascii85.S. spends billions of dollars on a bascii117reaascii117cratic ascii117nder-sascii117pervised intelligence apparatascii117s that enriches private contractors withoascii117t necessarily making the coascii117ntry safer. What is remarkable is the thoroascii117ghness with which these claims are do*****ented.
Argascii117ably, in attempting to represent the state of sascii117ch a complex system Top Secret America recreates the information overload in microcosm. The end prodascii117ct is so big and so dense that it is hard to take it all in. Initially, senior intelligence officials made some weak attempts to pascii117sh back against Top Secret America, particascii117larly against what they called the &ldqascii117o;myth&rdqascii117o; that contractors perform inherently governmental fascii117nctions. They did not take issascii117e with the Post s claims aboascii117t what contractors do, they qascii117ibbled aboascii117t the definition of &ldqascii117o;inherently governmental.&rdqascii117o;
In the end, the intelcrats let the conclascii117sions of the series stand more or less ascii117nchallenged. Some may even be gratefascii117l. Priest and Arkin probably taascii117ght them a lot aboascii117t their own bascii117siness.
