The psychology of recruiting is powerful and well understood.
Kids and those with low self esteem are the most ideal targets. There are a series of markers that point to their unblinking inexpensive utility. *[See “Reason to Believe“, JChron, 2013].
By contrast; with the “confident” this threat base can be easily created through brief observation and “rejection series” style techniques. Whether they realise it or not, most base their confidence on one or two pillars that can simply be shaken. Then offer purpose, at their lowest point [or even just a “lower” point], to restore intrapsychic stability. They will take it. Must, even.
This is not difficult to understand. And once recruited, post hoc justification is the norm to such a degree that the point of it being undeniably psycho-biological in nature need not be argued. Those who take service on board as part of their identity (and especially if they are already trained in certain techniques), find it virtually impossible to leave, even if disaffected. And all take the identity on board, by design.
The disaffected instead becoming jaded and apathetic. As it is with any field, it could be argued. As who wants to find a new job and start again?
But key in all of these operations is Humint. And it always will be. That is what is being lost more and more today, but can not be replaced by a “G- Dossier” that could pass for two phone books taped together. Any target can be justified; it is Humint that activates and validates intelligence products, as well as saving precious time in directional product development.
This is not to say Sigit/Comit et al is not outstanding in its contributions, when it is targeted. But increasing Sigit at the expense of Humint is a mistake.
And the funding could be better spent. We haven’t learned anything we did not already know. Or would have found out via traditional means.
The concept of “Green Badgers”, that are already in positions where they essentially hold all of the cards [Schmidt, Gates, Jobs…ect], is astoundingly simple in nature; but is also Humint in its activation. Give them purpose. Legitemise their use of their power. Ease their guilt in what they are doing anyway.
Digital rights organization, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), has released a list of which companies fight for your privacy: Twitter getting one of the only 5 star ratings (EFF, 2013 Report ac2014). Though no-one is ever permanently out of reach.
|Tells users about government
|Publishes transparency reports||Publishes law enforcement guidelines||Fights for users’ privacy rights
|Fights for users’ privacy rights
Accessibility is [and always has been] so complete is the point. Complete, even without CEOs, such that with just minor tech and low level personnel, it can be posited that the new multi pentagon style fusion centres are not requisite but rather extravagance.
The improved infrastructure, from a global perspective, is really not needed: Humint is enough. *[Although, that being said, the copper free system is a necessity in Australia if we want to keep our systems cutting edge. But only as we are so behind]. For the first time, since the Howard years, our staff have had complete clearance for our own, and other allied, intelligence networks. Obviously this best be protected, while this theatre becomes [and remains] a global focus. This gets a pass for the new Canberra [et al] very large FC’s. But for an international focus.
Now, that is not to say our stunning Feds [who do act internationally as the “guns” behind a lot of our best actionable intelligence] should not monitor domestically for serious felonies and threats. This is not a cry for pseudo-privacy by any means; the only argument here is not in lieu of Humint. All good intelligence is time sensitive, yesterday for next week. A dragnet does not do this. No algorithm that I have seen yet can. Nothing is completely off loop if accuracy is a concern. *[Iff~A].
There are still more defense intelligence positions available, public and private, than has been the case for a long time. For now. But the dwindle has began. Contractors are like casuals in this respect. Yet, it is psychological control that is the key to security. To bend people without breaking them.
While reflecting on security systems today, it occurred to me that whether you are the Fed or any bank; a private business; a hospital; a government department; or the ONA, DIGO or NSA themselves: your security is ultimately only as good as that contract temp that started last Friday, who is covering for Shirley while she has her baby.
That is not to say don’t hire women, but rather that vetting matters. And it takes time. As Snowden illustrates perfectly.
This is why you can not cut Humint funding. Or else there will be no one to trust downstream to actually RUN this massive infrastructure . Or make sense of it. Although, It should be said, I am far from against private contractors. Again, this goes to vetting.
When reflecting on budgets, however, privatization is not the only path. As stated above; we knew all this stuff already. Between Facebook and one technician at a telco, “the big scoop” is at best over priced.
Think about what you can access at your work, as an example. What low level bank employees have access too; low level office staff; low level hospital staff; kids on college campuses; not to mentions kids raised on Hollywood films more generally (ie all of them) who end up in these fields at various levels [complete with first divorce; midlife crisis ect] – there was never hidden information when it was wanted.
This is why reading Spec. Op. Reports suggesting DIA are removing 90% of their Humint capacity [K Patton] is disheartening.
Employers of the generic social infrastructure are simply too large to ever be impregnable. Opportunity abounds, inside every employee.
Perhaps the dragnet is almost more ethical. I could hear that argument.
But there is something to be said for not spending excess billions on
tech apparatus, that the private sector was largely already going to build; and THEN hiring analysts to interpret it all anyway: when the
current field/domicile analysts could have done nearly all of it on their own.
So much money, so many livelihoods, and for what?
When all it has ever taken is one …weak… link.
J.J.R for GSI
J.J.R.- Analyst (Provs.) . “Humint & The Utility of Large Green Badgers”. GSI Internal, (8), 21p. Ed7.