# Former Spy With Agenda Operates a Private C.I.A.



## Florida173 (Jan 23, 2011)

This is an interesting article, although from the NY Times.  I don't necessarily disagree with this guys agenda, but maybe I'm missing an important point here.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/world/23clarridge.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&hp


> WASHINGTON — Duane R. Clarridge parted company with the Central Intelligence Agency more than two decades ago, but from poolside at his home near San Diego, he still runs a network of spies.
> Michael D. Furlong arranged Mr. Clarridge’s military contract.
> Over the past two years, he has fielded operatives in the mountains of Pakistan and the desert badlands of Afghanistan.  Since the United States military cut off his funding in May, he has  relied on like-minded private donors to pay his agents to continue  gathering information about militant fighters, Taliban leaders and the secrets of Kabul’s ruling class.
> Hatching schemes that are something of a cross between a Graham Greene novel and Mad Magazine’s “Spy vs. Spy,” Mr. Clarridge has sought to discredit Ahmed Wali Karzai,  the Kandahar power broker who has long been on the C.I.A. payroll, and  planned to set spies on his half brother, the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai,  in hopes of collecting beard trimmings or other DNA samples that might  prove Mr. Clarridge’s suspicions that the Afghan leader was a heroin  addict, associates say.
> ...


----------



## Marauder06 (Jan 23, 2011)

Karzai's brother?  We really need a civilian quasi-spy agency to tell us he's corrupt? Talk about soft targets...

Have they done anything meaningful against the Haqqani Network?  If so I'll start taking them seriously.


----------



## Crusader74 (Jan 23, 2011)

Wonder if he knows a certain Jack....


----------



## SpitfireV (Jan 24, 2011)

Comparing his company, and by extension himself, to the OSS and Bill Donovan is a bit much.


----------



## RetPara (Jan 24, 2011)

It would be wise to do more research on Clarridge and take the grandiose NYT article with a grain of salt.  Clarridge was running HUMINT before a lot of folks here learned to walk.


----------



## Centermass (Jan 24, 2011)

> But he warned against Mr. Clarridge’s recent activities, saying that private spies operating in war zones “can get both nations in trouble and themselves in trouble.” He added, “We don’t need privateers.”



Allen is exactly right in making the statement above. If Clarridge is not currently "Read in on" the present day, and neither side knows for sure the who, what, when where and why of what each is doing, it could have conflicting and damaging consequences, due to lack of proper coordination, command and control.  His intentions may be well founded and his ideas novel, but the continued rogue-ess execution of such, along with lack of oversight and accountability to any command authority, now that his contract has been pulled, IMO, is akin to using canaries in a coal mine.


----------



## Manolito (Jan 24, 2011)

I think there is a place for both. When you look at the raid on Son Tay if we had a private firm on the ground that could have supplied intel we would have known no US prisoners were at the prison. This would have allowed us to try another target without the cat being out of the bag.
Just my thoughts.
Bill


----------



## SpitfireV (Jan 24, 2011)

RetPara said:


> It would be wise to do more research on Clarridge and take the grandiose NYT article with a grain of salt.  Clarridge was running HUMINT before a lot of folks here learned to walk.



And? Just because he was doing something for years doesn't mean he's right to do it privately.

Agree with CM on this.


----------



## RetPara (Jan 25, 2011)

Various intell organizations have hired individual and corporate contractors for decades.  It was an accepted practice long before the words "black" and "water" were joined into a proper noun.  It's a way to access skills and talents that are rare, perishable, or expensive.  Those going that route are then paid what they are really worth per the market place.  Basing an opinion on the statements made by a source with a known agenda (NYT) without multiple references does a disservice to many people who have served their country loyally for DECADES with little personal gain.  That they continue to do so, but at market rates, recognizes their value.

In direct reference to Duane Clarridge, he has a negative history with the press going back decades.  He doesn't roll over.  Also I don't believe you will find many, if any, that he has been associated with during his career that would quantify him as rogue.  He is Old School HUMINT from the days that agent handling was THE art that lead to advancement in CIA.  If you ever work with him, you'll find a man of the highest principles that I would trust with my dogs, my family, but never my liquor.


----------



## SpitfireV (Jan 26, 2011)

Really, any agenda that a newspaper might have is totally irrelevant because the essence of the matter is that he's working without authorisation and without a contract. He could be fucking up more ops with this.

The other essential question to ask is, who is paying for this? Private interests financing either this work or other quasi-government work raises questions.


----------



## Echo (Mar 30, 2011)

Sweet.


----------



## Echo (Mar 30, 2011)

Sweet. Wish I could have worked with him.


----------



## SpitfireV (Mar 30, 2011)

Tell me if I'm out of line but I don't think you should be posting that.


----------



## Echo (Mar 30, 2011)

SpitfireV said:


> Tell me if I'm out of line but I don't think you should be posting that.



Doesn't mention any specific details on locations, personnel, or operations but please remove if OPSEC.


----------



## SpitfireV (Mar 30, 2011)

That's not up to me, it's up to you or the mods.


----------



## Echo (Mar 30, 2011)

Yea that was for staff. But I edited it anyway. Better safe than sorry.


----------

