Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 8/29/2013 1:28:29 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline 		Here it is, don't miss it.

$52.6 billion
The Black Budget
Covert action. Surveillance. Counterintelligence. The U.S. “black budget” spans over a dozen agencies that make up the National Intelligence Program.

----

I think it took some courage to leak and then publish this information.

< Message edited by cloudboy -- 8/29/2013 1:30:42 PM >
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 8/29/2013 1:31:08 PM   
JeffBC


Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline 		So do these costs include spying on your girlfriend or is that service extra? :)

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 8/29/2013 1:33:34 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline
There is a mother-load of information in that link. It will take some time to go through it. Bradley Manning got 35 years in jail and Snowden fled the USA so such information might be available to the American public.

(in reply to JeffBC)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 8/29/2013 1:39:55 PM   
JeffBC


Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
There is a mother-load of information in that link. It will take some time to go through it. Bradley Manning got 35 years in jail and Snowden fled the USA so such information might be available to the American public.

*nods* Don't get me wrong, I was just making a recent events joke. I'm very glad we have that information and I'm very glad people much more knowledgeable than me about domestic surveillance in particular are going to be looking at it.

It's worth noting I have zero faith that $52.6 billion is the total spend here. My general understanding is that some of this stuff gets buried so deep it never shows up anywhere.

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 8/29/2013 1:41:33 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline 		Last year I donated a few thousand to their budget... If they would ask me I'd donate a few more for a job well done.

Butch

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 8/29/2013 2:04:07 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline 		I'm surprised the number is that low.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to kdsub)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 8/29/2013 2:16:44 PM   
Esinn


Posts: 886
Joined: 6/23/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC


It's worth noting I have zero faith that $52.6 billion is the total spend here. My general understanding is that some of this stuff gets buried so deep it never shows up anywhere.


http://www.fas.org/irp/budget/index.html

It is not.... Even Wikipedia knows this.....

It gets kind of tricky:
http://www1.american.edu/salla/Articles/BB-CIA.htm

And Strange:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/IB87201.pdf

This cat:
halmers Johnson, Nemesis: The Final Days of the American Republic, Henry Holt & Co., New York, 2006,
Estimates 40% of the budget is black.

_____________________________

Let's break the law

(in reply to JeffBC)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 8/29/2013 2:20:47 PM   
Esinn


Posts: 886
Joined: 6/23/2009
Status: offline 		It is not adding up properly at first glance. Though this WaPo article is as new to me as everyone. (I am familiar with the 2 previous articles I linked)

< Message edited by Esinn -- 8/29/2013 2:21:41 PM >

_____________________________

Let's break the law

(in reply to Esinn)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 8/29/2013 2:33:13 PM   
Esinn


Posts: 886
Joined: 6/23/2009
Status: offline 		http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/ "We got money to burn as long as it is kept secret". I am in Indiana BTW

_____________________________

Let's break the law

(in reply to Esinn)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 8/29/2013 3:33:46 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline 		This story is based upon 2013 primary, classified sources.

-----

The 1989 document you cite is still 100% relevant.

10-24-89 ISSUE DEFINITION

Executive and legislative oversight of highly classified defense programs is of increasing interest to Congress. Members of Congress frequently ask :

(1) How large is the Department of Defense (DOD) ''black budget?"

(2) Does DOD deny Congress information on ''black" programs?

(3) How well managed are DOD "black" programs? This interest has grown from concern about (a) the adequacy of legislative oversight, (b) the quality of executive branch program management, (c) the perception that an increasing number of DOD programs, by virtue of their classification, are allowed to circumvent acquisition requirements and avoid proper oversight, (d) the relatively large increase in funding for so-called "black" programs between 1981 and 1988 (e) the perception that the security surrounding ''black" programs prevents .full and effective congressional debate of pertinent program issues.


< Message edited by cloudboy -- 8/29/2013 3:39:12 PM >

(in reply to Esinn)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 8/29/2013 3:45:40 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline 		What is generally meant by the expression "black" program?

According to DOD, the expression '"black program' has no official status in any DOD policy or regulation." In using the term "black budget," most observers are making a generic reference to the programs (including intelligence programs) for which DOD has not provided unclassified funding data and those programs that can be easily identified as classified programs as a result of the names they have been given in unclassified defense budget justification books.

(Some programs have undeniably odd names, for example, the Air Force research and development program named BERNIE.) This imprecision prompts many observers to generalize about all classified programs.

The expression "black program" may be used to describe a program, according to DOD, "whose very existence and purpose may in and of itself be classified." Such a program would be categorized as a special access program by DOD; however, "not all special access programs are 'black,' i.e., their existence may not be classified."

Until recently, an example of a ''black program" cited by the press was the so-called Stealth fighter aircraft about which there had been considerable media speculation but whose existence DOD did not officially acknowledge. In November 1988, DOD acknowledged for the first time the existence of the Stealth F-117A fighter, which had been unofficially referred to as the F-19 in earlier media reports. By contrast, the Stealth B-2 bomber program is a special access program whose existence DOD does acknowledge.


Good stuff.

(in reply to Esinn)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 8/29/2013 5:32:19 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Esinn


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC


It's worth noting I have zero faith that $52.6 billion is the total spend here. My general understanding is that some of this stuff gets buried so deep it never shows up anywhere.


http://www.fas.org/irp/budget/index.html

It is not.... Even Wikipedia knows this.....

It gets kind of tricky:
http://www1.american.edu/salla/Articles/BB-CIA.htm

And Strange:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/IB87201.pdf

This cat:
halmers Johnson, Nemesis: The Final Days of the American Republic, Henry Holt & Co., New York, 2006,
Estimates 40% of the budget is black.

The US budget is in excess of 3 trillion dollars. We know where it goes well enough to know that $1.2+ trillion is not spent on black ops.

(in reply to Esinn)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 8/30/2013 4:25:29 AM   
Zonie63


Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
I think it took some courage to leak and then publish this information.


Interesting article, although I didn't find the explanation as to why the intel budget is classified very convincing:

quote:

“The United States has made a considerable investment in the Intelligence Community since the terror attacks of 9/11, a time which includes wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Arab Spring, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction technology, and asymmetric threats in such areas as cyber-warfare,” Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. wrote in response to inquiries from The Post.

“Our budgets are classified as they could provide insight for foreign intelligence services to discern our top national priorities, capabilities and sources and methods that allow us to obtain information to counter threats,” he said.

It really shouldn't be that difficult for foreign governments to discern our top national priorities even by reviewing political speeches, media propaganda, non-classified articles and other materials for public consumption. They don't need to know the intel budget to be able to figure out our national priorities, so there's no reason to keep it classified.

During the Cold War, one thing I remember hearing is that the typical foreign intelligence agent would not usually be found sneaking around top secret installations like some super spy. Instead, they'd mostly be in public libraries, reviewing as much non-classified material as they could and extrapolating from that. (That's what our own reporters should be doing, instead of sitting around waiting for someone like Snowden to spoon feed them all this.)




(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 8/30/2013 4:45:45 AM   
JeffBC


Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
It really shouldn't be that difficult for foreign governments to discern our top national priorities even by reviewing political speeches, media propaganda, non-classified articles and other materials for public consumption. They don't need to know the intel budget to be able to figure out our national priorities, so there's no reason to keep it classified.

Man, even I'd be more generous than that and I hate the spook community. But I wouldn't want them to publish details. I'd want the total spend (for real). Then there might be some special interest segments that I want more detail on like "domestic surveillance" which really should be near zero. I sure don't want to see a line by line budget though.


_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to Zonie63)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 9/4/2013 10:47:14 PM   
Esinn


Posts: 886
Joined: 6/23/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Esinn


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC


It's worth noting I have zero faith that $52.6 billion is the total spend here. My general understanding is that some of this stuff gets buried so deep it never shows up anywhere.


http://www.fas.org/irp/budget/index.html

It is not.... Even Wikipedia knows this.....

It gets kind of tricky:
http://www1.american.edu/salla/Articles/BB-CIA.htm

And Strange:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/IB87201.pdf

This cat:
halmers Johnson, Nemesis: The Final Days of the American Republic, Henry Holt & Co., New York, 2006,
Estimates 40% of the budget is black.

The US budget is in excess of 3 trillion dollars. We know where it goes well enough to know that $1.2+ trillion is not spent on black ops.



You have a bad habit of making broad vague assertions without demonstration. That is bad math. How do I block you? Or can you block me?

_____________________________

Let's break the law

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 9/5/2013 1:18:27 AM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

Here it is, don't miss it.

$52.6 billion
The Black Budget
Covert action. Surveillance. Counterintelligence. The U.S. “black budget” spans over a dozen agencies that make up the National Intelligence Program.

----

I think it took some courage to leak and then publish this information.



Gotta love all that transparency!


_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post - 9/5/2013 5:14:05 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Esinn


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Esinn


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC


It's worth noting I have zero faith that $52.6 billion is the total spend here. My general understanding is that some of this stuff gets buried so deep it never shows up anywhere.


http://www.fas.org/irp/budget/index.html

It is not.... Even Wikipedia knows this.....

It gets kind of tricky:
http://www1.american.edu/salla/Articles/BB-CIA.htm

And Strange:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/IB87201.pdf

This cat:
halmers Johnson, Nemesis: The Final Days of the American Republic, Henry Holt & Co., New York, 2006,
Estimates 40% of the budget is black.

The US budget is in excess of 3 trillion dollars. We know where it goes well enough to know that $1.2+ trillion is not spent on black ops.



You have a bad habit of making broad vague assertions without demonstration. That is bad math. How do I block you? Or can you block me?

Your claim is that 40% of the US budget is black. I pointed out the actual numbers. If you can't deal with reality then I suggest finding a nice padded room and a jacket with sleeves that wrap around.

(in reply to Esinn)
Profile   Post #: 17
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Blockbuster Story from the Washington Post Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094