servizi segreti

As required by law, the Director of National Intelligence today disclosed that the budget for the National Intelligence Program in Fiscal Year 2007 was $43.5 billion.
The disclosure was strongly resisted by the intelligence bureaucracy, and for that very reason it may have significant repercussions for national security classification policy.
Although the aggregate intelligence budget figures for 1997 and 1998 ($26.6 and $26.7 billion respectively) had previously been disclosed in response to a Freedom of  information Act lawsuit brought by the Federation of American Scientists, intelligence officials literally swore under oath that any further disclosures would damage national
“Information about the intelligence budget is of great interest to nations and non-state groups (e.g., terrorists and drug traffickers) wishing to calculate the strengths and weaknesses of the United States and their own points of vulnerability to U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies,” then-DCI George J. Tenet told a federal court in April 2003, explaining his position that disclosure of the intelligence budget total would cause “serious damage” to the United States.
Even historical budget information from half a century ago “must be withheld from public disclosure… because its release would tend to reveal intelligence methods,” declared then-acting DCI John E. McLaughlin in a 2004 lawsuit, also filed by FAS.
Deferring to executive authority, federal judges including Judge Thomas F. Hogan and Judge Ricardo M. Urbina accepted these statements at face value and ruled in favor of continued secrecy.
But now it appears that such information may safely be disclosed after all.
Because the new disclosure is so sharply at odds with past practice, it may introduce some positive instability into a recalcitrant classification system.  The question implicitly arises, if intelligence officials were wrong to classify this information, what other data are they wrongly withholding?


For better or worse, contractors are now an indispensable part of the U.S. intelligence workforce, and greater attention is needed to manage them effectively, argues a recent study by a military intelligence analyst.

The author presents criteria for evaluating contractor support to various intelligence functions, and applies them in a series of case studies.

“This study assesses the value of current commercial activities used within DoD elements of the Intelligence Community, particularly dealing with operational functions such as analysis, collection management, document exploitation, interrogation, production, and linguistic support.”

In the best case, interactions with contractors can serve as a spur towards modernization of the intelligence bureaucracy itself, suggests the author, Glenn R. Voelz, a U.S. Army Major.

“Collaborative effort with nongovernmental entities offers a powerful mechanism to diversify and strengthen the IC’s collection and analytical capabilities, but to fully realize the benefit of these resources the management and oversight of commercial providers must become a core competency for all intelligence organizations.”

A copy of the study, published by the Joint Military Intelligence College, was obtained by Secrecy News.

See “Managing the Private Spies: The Use of Commercial Augmentation for Intelligence Operations” by Maj. Glenn J. Voelz, Joint Military Intelligence College, June 2006:

Novità su

Intus Legere presenta il “Forum sulla Legge di riforma dei Servizi”.
Si apre oggi su Intus Legere il “Forum sulla Legge di riforma dei
Servizi”. Autorevolissimi commentatori ed esperti del settore
confronteranno idee, opinioni e proposte inerenti la nuova Legge
124/2007 sulla “Struttura del sistema di informazione per la sicurezza
della Repubblica e nuova discipina del segreto” che entrerà in vigore il
prossimo 12 ottobre.
Già disponibile on line il primo contributo del Prof. Marco Giaconi. A
breve il contributo del Prof. Mario Caligiuri.

Buona lettura.

Intus Legere Staff


questa la legge che andrà in vigore dal 12 Ottobre. su il forum per la discussione sulle tematiche.