3 ms·

Huge parts of these agencies' activities have been moved off the books or to private entities. It's not as simple a matter as just cutting off their funding any

Huge parts of these agencies' activities have been moved off the books or to private entities. It's not as simple a matter as just cutting off their funding anymore.

culturestate 6y ago
The off-the-books money that the CIA uses to pay those shady Raytheon subsidiaries doesn't appear out of thin air. It may be several layers removed and cycled through a few South American laundromats, but its genesis is always the U.S. Treasury.
- AndrewBissell 6y ago
  The genesis is often illegal activities of various kinds, especially drug trafficking. Although I agree that is probably not enough money to run a mass surveillance operation on the scale of the NSA in perpetuity.
kelnos 6y ago
Sure, but the money still has to come from somewhere, and that's from appropriations authorized by Congress. Now, if you believe that these agencies have amassed and hoarded enough of the money they've already been given that they now have an endowment that can perpetually fund their activities, then yes, that would mean you really can't stop them. But I'd find it hard to believe that's the case; what they do is not cheap, and I'd be surprised if there's all that much left over after they spend their yearly budget on regular operations. If Congress voted to completely defund these agencies, they'd go away. Not immediately, and I'm sure there will still be some in power who create limited shadow agencies that run on much, much smaller budgets, but they can't operate at the scale they do now without continued funding.
- brobdingnagians 6y ago
  I'm not so sure they would go away without a fight. These are people who gave grown accustomed to breaking laws (including US laws), fomenting coups, and even assassinations in order to gain control. If Congress was seriously threatening to abolish them, Congressmen might start having a sharp uptick in "accidents". That's the problem with getting in bed with dubious characters.
  - kelnos 6y ago
    Oh, certainly. But I find it hard to believe that these agencies would keep the support of the public if they started assassinating Congresspeople. At some point there's too much opposition to make it feasible to continue on. Really, though, I'd expect them to maintain Congress' support through non-lethal means. Bribery, blackmail, stuff like that. A Congressperson in your pocket is much more useful than a suspiciously-dead body. But still, if US citizens as a whole really wanted them gone, they'd just continue voting in people who will take a hard line against funding them. I don't expect something like this to come to pass, mind you, but it's possible.
- erikerikson 6y ago
  https://www.iqt.org/ https://www.iqt.org/
  - kelnos 6y ago
    Not sure what your point is. Sure, the 3-letter agencies have an investment arm, but the capital used for those investments is a tiny fraction of their operating budget. And that capital still comes from Congress' appropriations.
    - erikerikson 6y ago
      The parent previously offered that three letter agencies would require an investment arm to sustain themselves. In that context, I offered that they had one. I can't claim any knowledge about the profitability of that group or what portion of funding is provided by that group which is relevant and you have added perspective on. I have personally experienced InQTel as an alternative funding mechanism which argues against it being a serious funding source.
- spookythrow 6y ago
  > Now, if you believe that these agencies have amassed and hoarded enough of the money they've already been given that they now have an endowment that can perpetually fund their activities, then yes, that would mean you really can't stop them. But I'd find it hard to believe that's the case; what they do is not cheap, and I'd be surprised if there's all that much left over after they spend their yearly budget on regular operations. What do you think In-Q-Tel[1] is for? It's about ensuring that the TLAs will exist in perpetuity regardless of Congress. 1. http://www.iqt.org http://www.iqt.org
- wholepicture 6y ago
  "The money has to come" And the hope, with all this surrounding us, that somebody must made exclusive findings ? P-:

Huge parts of these agencies' activities have been moved off the books or to private entities. It's not as simple a matter as just cutting off their funding anymore.

culturestate 6y ago

The off-the-books money that the CIA uses to pay those shady Raytheon subsidiaries doesn't appear out of thin air. It may be several layers removed and cycled through a few South American laundromats, but its genesis is always the U.S. Treasury.

AndrewBissell 6y ago
The genesis is often illegal activities of various kinds, especially drug trafficking. Although I agree that is probably not enough money to run a mass surveillance operation on the scale of the NSA in perpetuity.

kelnos 6y ago

Sure, but the money still has to come from somewhere, and that's from appropriations authorized by Congress. Now, if you believe that these agencies have amassed and hoarded enough of the money they've already been given that they now have an endowment that can perpetually fund their activities, then yes, that would mean you really can't stop them. But I'd find it hard to believe that's the case; what they do is not cheap, and I'd be surprised if there's all that much left over after they spend their yearly budget on regular operations. If Congress voted to completely defund these agencies, they'd go away. Not immediately, and I'm sure there will still be some in power who create limited shadow agencies that run on much, much smaller budgets, but they can't operate at the scale they do now without continued funding.

brobdingnagians 6y ago
I'm not so sure they would go away without a fight. These are people who gave grown accustomed to breaking laws (including US laws), fomenting coups, and even assassinations in order to gain control. If Congress was seriously threatening to abolish them, Congressmen might start having a sharp uptick in "accidents". That's the problem with getting in bed with dubious characters.
- kelnos 6y ago
  Oh, certainly. But I find it hard to believe that these agencies would keep the support of the public if they started assassinating Congresspeople. At some point there's too much opposition to make it feasible to continue on. Really, though, I'd expect them to maintain Congress' support through non-lethal means. Bribery, blackmail, stuff like that. A Congressperson in your pocket is much more useful than a suspiciously-dead body. But still, if US citizens as a whole really wanted them gone, they'd just continue voting in people who will take a hard line against funding them. I don't expect something like this to come to pass, mind you, but it's possible.
erikerikson 6y ago
https://www.iqt.org/ https://www.iqt.org/
- kelnos 6y ago
  Not sure what your point is. Sure, the 3-letter agencies have an investment arm, but the capital used for those investments is a tiny fraction of their operating budget. And that capital still comes from Congress' appropriations.
  - erikerikson 6y ago
    The parent previously offered that three letter agencies would require an investment arm to sustain themselves. In that context, I offered that they had one. I can't claim any knowledge about the profitability of that group or what portion of funding is provided by that group which is relevant and you have added perspective on. I have personally experienced InQTel as an alternative funding mechanism which argues against it being a serious funding source.
spookythrow 6y ago
> Now, if you believe that these agencies have amassed and hoarded enough of the money they've already been given that they now have an endowment that can perpetually fund their activities, then yes, that would mean you really can't stop them. But I'd find it hard to believe that's the case; what they do is not cheap, and I'd be surprised if there's all that much left over after they spend their yearly budget on regular operations. What do you think In-Q-Tel[1] is for? It's about ensuring that the TLAs will exist in perpetuity regardless of Congress. 1. http://www.iqt.org http://www.iqt.org
wholepicture 6y ago
"The money has to come" And the hope, with all this surrounding us, that somebody must made exclusive findings ? P-: