McCain and Obama differences on intelligence

From Bloomberg.com:

John McCain and Barack Obama agree that the next president needs to shake up U.S. spy operations. That’s where the similarity ends.

Whoever wins Nov. 4, the next president must overhaul a $47.5 billion intelligence effort, spread through 16 agencies, that’s still struggling seven years after failing to prevent the Sept. 11 attacks and six years after wrongly concluding that Iraq had WMD.

The latest challenge involves revamping a 2004 law that was supposed to repair flaws exposed by 9/11 and Iraq, national security analysts say. The law established a new office led by a director of national intelligence, or DNI, to oversee the CIA and other intelligence operations. So far, the law has added a layer of bureaucracy without giving the director – currently former NSA Director Mike McConnell – enough authority over agencies’ budgets, national security analysts say.

“The DNI is still very much a work in progress, and a lot people are thinking it’s not working,” says Mark Lowenthal, former CIA assistant director for analysis and production. The next president must get it right, because U.S. spies face an array of threats besides terrorists and hostile countries like Iran and North Korea, advisers from both campaigns say.

DHS cybersecurity proposals more modest than DNI comments suggested

From HS Daily Wire:

Earlier this year Director of U.S. National Intelligence Mike McConnell said the government would require broad powers to monitor all Internet traffic in order to secure the U.S. critical information infrastructure; DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff outlines a more modest approach.

Earlier this year, Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell told the New Yorker that the government would require broad powers to monitor all Internet traffic in order to secure the U.S. critical information infrastructure. Chertoff outlined a┬ámore modest agenda, saying that his agency’s primary goal would be to “get control of the dot-gov domain,” and insisting that government involvement in securing private networks would be strictly by invitation.