Jump to content


Photo

U.s. Capital Moving From Dc To Denver?


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 hashfanatic

hashfanatic

    Godol Hador

  • Banned
  • 5,704 posts

Posted 12 July 2005 - 04:58 AM

washingtonpost.com

CIA Plans to Shift Work to Denver
Domestic Division Would Be Moved

By Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 6, 2005; Page A21

The CIA has plans to relocate the headquarters of its domestic division, which is responsible for operations and recruitment in the United States, from the CIA's Langley headquarters to Denver, a move designed to promote innovation, according to U.S. intelligence and law enforcement officials.

About $20 million has been tentatively budgeted to relocate employees of the CIA's National Resources Division, officials said. A U.S. intelligence official said the planned move, confirmed by three other government officials, was being undertaken "for operational reasons."

About $20 million has been tentatively budgeted to relocate employees in the CIA's National Resources Division from Langley, according to officials.

A CIA spokesman declined to comment. Other current and former intelligence officials said the Denver relocation reflects the desire of CIA Director Porter J. Goss to develop new ways to operate under cover, including setting up more front corporations and working closer with established international firms.

Associates of Goss said yesterday that the move was also in keeping with his desire to stop the growth of CIA headquarters and headquarters-based group-think, something he criticized frequently when he was chairman of the House intelligence committee.

Other CIA veterans said such a relocation would make no sense, given Denver's relative distance from major corporate centers. "Why would you go so far away?" one asked. "They will get disconnected."

The main function of the domestic division, which has stations in many major U.S. cities, is to conduct voluntary debriefings of U.S. citizens who travel overseas for work or to visit relatives, and to recruit foreign students, diplomats and businesspeople to become CIA assets when they return to their countries. It was unclear how many CIA employees would relocate to Denver under the plan.

Although collecting information on U.S. citizens under suspicion for terrorist links is primarily an FBI function, the CIA may also collect information on citizens under limited circumstances, according to a 1981 executive order. The exact guidelines for those operations are spelled out in a classified document signed by the CIA director and approved by the attorney general.

The Denver move, which is tentatively scheduled for next year but has not been finalized, coincides with several other developments related to the CIA's domestic intelligence work.

Last week, the CIA and FBI agreed to a new "memorandum of understanding" on domestic and foreign operations, the first change in decades. The negotiations surrounding the memo were highly contentious, with the FBI saying that it should control and approve the CIA's domestic activities, including its pool of U.S.-based assets that have been invaluable in the past to understanding the intentions of foreign nations and groups.

But the FBI is having significant problems developing its own domestic intelligence branch and the CIA is generally viewed across the intelligence community as more experienced and skilled at handling foreign informants who eventually return abroad, where the CIA has the lead in intelligence gathering and operations.

Both the CIA and FBI are trying to deepen their outreach to U.S. research and academic institutions and to private subcontractors working on major government contracts abroad.

Originally, the FBI also pressed to have the bureau disseminate all intelligence reports from sources -- foreigners or U.S. citizens -- living in the United States. It was undercut, however, by the fact that the bureau routinely falls behind in issuing counterterrorism reports and, at the time of the most heated negotiations, in December, the FBI had a backlog of more than 100 reports it had not distributed.

In response to questions this week about the new agreement, the FBI and CIA issued a joint statement to The Washington Post. "The FBI and CIA are committed to effective, joint operations to safeguard our nation," it says. "To that end, we are completing work on a memorandum of understanding that will codify our joint operating principals. We are pleased with both the process and the outcome and we recognize that our joint efforts will enhance national security."

Under the agreement, the CIA must coordinate its operations with the FBI. The CIA's domestic division has agreed to provide the FBI with more information about its operations and debriefings. One goal of updating the memo was to ensure that the two agencies were not working at cross purposes and were aware if one or the other had already recruited or debriefed someone.

It is unclear how a move to Denver would increase the effectiveness of the domestic division's operations, said several former intelligence officials.

Colorado has become a major intelligence hub since Sept. 11, 2001.

The Denver suburb of Aurora is home to the little-known Aerospace Data Facility. Located inside Buckley Air Force Base, it has become the major U.S.-based technical downlink for intelligence satellites operated by the military, the National Security Agency and the National Reconnaissance Office, according to military and government documents obtained by William Arkin, author of "Code Names," a book about secret military plans and programs.

About 70 miles away, the U.S. Northern Command, based at Peterson Air Force Base, in Colorado Springs, is tasked with homeland defense and has been increasing its domestic intelligence work.

It could not be learned whether the CIA's Denver plans are linked to the presence of either facility.

#2 Torn

Torn

    Every day is a gift

  • Members
  • 5,679 posts

Posted 12 July 2005 - 07:59 AM

Please correct the title of this thread. The US capital remains in DC and the article never suggested otherwise. CIA headquarters is in Virginia anyhow.
Fear is Temporary, Regret is Forever

Itís kind of fun to do the impossible -Walt Disney

#3 hashfanatic

hashfanatic

    Godol Hador

  • Banned
  • 5,704 posts

Posted 12 July 2005 - 08:08 AM

Notice question mark following first line of title, which would seem to indicate speculation and a request for critical thought and examination of an idea.

The CIA's disclosed location in Langley is IN Virginia. Parts of Virginia are considered part of the Washington D.C. metropolitan area.

Please note that this fact is noted in the very first sentence of the article.

Please leave the title of this article and all else connected with thought development on this issue unchanged.

Thank you.

#4 Torn

Torn

    Every day is a gift

  • Members
  • 5,679 posts

Posted 12 July 2005 - 08:19 AM

Notice question mark following first line of title, which would seem to indicate speculation and a request for critical thought and examination of an idea.

The CIA's disclosed location in Langley is IN Virginia.  Parts of Virginia are considered part of the Washington D.C. metropolitan area.

Please note that this fact is noted in the very first sentence of the article.

Please leave the title of this article and all else connected with thought development on this issue unchanged.

Thank you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To be honest I missed the question mark but the point is still the same. Moving one branch of one department to Denver does not, by any stretch of the imagination, constitute the capital moving. Many, many government agencies and departments are headquartered in cities across the United States, does that mean the capital moved to each of those cities?
Fear is Temporary, Regret is Forever

Itís kind of fun to do the impossible -Walt Disney

#5 hashfanatic

hashfanatic

    Godol Hador

  • Banned
  • 5,704 posts

Posted 12 July 2005 - 08:23 AM

I know of something that has been unreported in the media, and wanted the board's feedback regarding the ramifications of Washington, DC being considered by many as being a highly unprotectable location for key installations, and Denver's viability as a capital for what would amount to a shadow government.

#6 Torn

Torn

    Every day is a gift

  • Members
  • 5,679 posts

Posted 12 July 2005 - 08:50 AM

I know of something that has been unreported in the media,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Didn't you quote the Washington Post?

and wanted the board's feedback regarding the ramifications of Washington, DC being considered by many as being a highly unprotectable location for key installations,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, if you read the article you'll see that the reason for moving was "to stop the growth of CIA headquarters and headquarters-based group-think". A serious problem the CIA has been grappling with for a number of years.

Nowhere was it alleged the move was made for security or safety reasons.

and Denver's viability as a capital for what would amount to a shadow government.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That wasn't what you asked. Your question implied that this department's move to Denver means that the capital has moved to Denver.

Whether Denver as a city is a viable option for an alternative capital is a whole other discussion and one not brought up here.
Fear is Temporary, Regret is Forever

Itís kind of fun to do the impossible -Walt Disney

#7 hashfanatic

hashfanatic

    Godol Hador

  • Banned
  • 5,704 posts

Posted 12 July 2005 - 09:02 AM

I know of something that has been unreported in the media,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Didn't you quote the Washington Post?

and wanted the board's feedback regarding the ramifications of Washington, DC being considered by many as being a highly unprotectable location for key installations,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, if you read the article you'll see that the reason for moving was "to stop the growth of CIA headquarters and headquarters-based group-think". A serious problem the CIA has been grappling with for a number of years.

Nowhere was it alleged the move was made for security or safety reasons.

and Denver's viability as a capital for what would amount to a shadow government.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That wasn't what you asked. Your question implied that this department's move to Denver means that the capital has moved to Denver.

Whether Denver as a city is a viable option for an alternative capital is a whole other discussion and one not brought up here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, no. When I say that I know of something that is as of yet unreported in the media, you can take that to mean that I have been made aware of a situation from an entirely different information system that I am not at liberty to identify.

Referencing the Washington Post article is simply a rehash of data I was already familiar with, and is being used to put the situation into easily readable terminology and to lend credibility to the whole concept itself.

#8 Torn

Torn

    Every day is a gift

  • Members
  • 5,679 posts

Posted 12 July 2005 - 09:08 AM

No, no.  When I say that I know of something that is as of yet unreported in the media, you can take that to mean that I have been made aware of a situation from an entirely different information system that I am not at liberty to identify.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Right... You sound like a childish CIA wanna-be...

Referencing the Washington Post article is simply a rehash of data I was already familiar with, and is being used to put the situation into easily readable terminology and to lend credibility to the whole concept itself.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You said it was unreported. If it appeared in the Washington Post then it is reported.

I made some other points in the above thread too. Why don't you address them?
Fear is Temporary, Regret is Forever

Itís kind of fun to do the impossible -Walt Disney

#9 hashfanatic

hashfanatic

    Godol Hador

  • Banned
  • 5,704 posts

Posted 12 July 2005 - 09:35 AM

No, just somebody who believes in keeping private sources of information private (admittedly an unusual concept these days).

Again, no. Read what I said critically. The information that was presented in the article is the information that I am providing for your benefit. The unreported information in the post is knowledge I am in possession of from other information systems which are not public.

In another words, I know of something that the media is not reporting on, and I feel no obligation to provide sources when it is unethical to do so. The snippet you have been given to work with is harmless for me to divulge, but otherwise there is no reason for me to suppress what I know so that you have the opportunity to examine the issue beforehand.

I don't know what other issue you brought up that I haven't already covered.

The article itself states that the move will "enhance national security".

Sometimes intelligence agencies provide reasons for doing things that may differ from the actual reasons. It's part of being an INTELLIGENCE agency.

Anything else?

#10 sultan_knish

sultan_knish

    Stan

  • Members
  • 4,756 posts

Posted 12 July 2005 - 09:06 PM

the CIA is not the capital

#11 hashfanatic

hashfanatic

    Godol Hador

  • Banned
  • 5,704 posts

Posted 12 July 2005 - 10:00 PM

Rumor has it that this is only the beginning of the creation of a shadow capital.

Nuff said.

#12 hashfanatic

hashfanatic

    Godol Hador

  • Banned
  • 5,704 posts

Posted 13 July 2005 - 01:55 PM

Also, there are reports of underground contruction going on, both in D.C. and Denver, with many residents of both communities reporting a steady hum emanating from the ground beneath their feet.

#13 sultan_knish

sultan_knish

    Stan

  • Members
  • 4,756 posts

Posted 17 July 2005 - 02:03 AM

Rumor has it that this is only the beginning of the creation of a shadow capital.

Nuff said.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

with darth vader living in it?

#14 Interested Party

Interested Party

    Godol Hador

  • Members
  • 2,553 posts

Posted 17 July 2005 - 02:08 AM

Well I did read on another thread that Karl Rove was really Yoda. Darth Vader just rounds out the party.

#15 sultan_knish

sultan_knish

    Stan

  • Members
  • 4,756 posts

Posted 17 July 2005 - 02:13 AM

Well I did read on another thread that Karl Rove was really Yoda.  Darth Vader just rounds out the party.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

now if only john kerry would begin to talk like chewbacca, there's a definite resemblance
Posted Image

Posted Image

#16 anavah

anavah

    Rebbe

  • Members
  • 1,581 posts

Posted 17 July 2005 - 02:52 AM

Rumor has it that this is only the beginning of the creation of a shadow capital.

Nuff said.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


The the government will be a shadow of its former self. :rolleyes:

#17 sultan_knish

sultan_knish

    Stan

  • Members
  • 4,756 posts

Posted 17 July 2005 - 02:54 AM

Rumor has it that this is only the beginning of the creation of a shadow capital.

Nuff said.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


The the government will be a shadow of its former self. :rolleyes:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

maybe we can have a shadow secretary like the british do, those sound cool

Posted Image

#18 hashfanatic

hashfanatic

    Godol Hador

  • Banned
  • 5,704 posts

Posted 17 July 2005 - 06:21 AM

The revolution will NOT be televised.

(On Viola Road and Sanz Court, that is).

#19 hashfanatic

hashfanatic

    Godol Hador

  • Banned
  • 5,704 posts

Posted 17 July 2005 - 06:22 AM

Well I did read on another thread that Karl Rove was really Yoda.  Darth Vader just rounds out the party.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"'Never again', is what you swore, the time before." --Martin Gore

#20 hashfanatic

hashfanatic

    Godol Hador

  • Banned
  • 5,704 posts

Posted 17 July 2005 - 02:33 PM

Rumor has it that this is only the beginning of the creation of a shadow capital.

Nuff said.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


The the government will be a shadow of its former self. :rolleyes:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Unfortunately, that's a fait accompli.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users