Pubdate: Sun, 17 Jun 2007
Source: Tribune-Democrat, The (PA)
Copyright: 2007 The Tribune-Democrat
Contact:  http://www.tribune-democrat.com
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/4063
Author: John T. Counihan

CRITICS GIVE FALSE IMPRESSION OF NDIC'S VITAL TASK

- -- What I read in or hear from the media about the National Drug 
Intelligence Center can only be characterized as either 
misinformation or disinformation.

It is difficult to ascertain whether this occurs because of benign 
ignorance of NDIC's assigned role within the counter-drug community, 
or more insidiously from petty partisan politics combined with 
interagency funding envy. (I have my idea as to the answer, and I 
will let the reader decide for him-or herself.) Unfortunately, since 
the perception of media reporting about NDIC, although inaccurate, is 
viewed as reality, both the reputation and employees of NDIC are 
continuously painted with a tarnished brush. I speak with some 
experience, as I am a retired Drug Enforcement Administration 
supervisory special agent with 30-plus years of narcotic enforcement 
experience - almost seven (1997-2004) of which were an assignment by 
the DEA to the NDIC.

I served in a number of positions at NDIC. The majority of my time 
was spent in the Document and Computer Exploitation Division (DOCEX), 
and for more than a year I had the privilege of serving as an acting 
assistant director of NDIC, directly in charge of this division. 
Among other assignments, I served in a supervisory capacity in the 
intelligence division.

As a result of my service and experience with NDIC, I can 
unequivocally state that the DOCEX performs a unique and invaluable 
service for the federal narcotics-enforcement community, and on 
occasion provides assistance to state and local narcotics-enforcement 
agencies operating in a task-force environment with a federal agency.

The tedious and labor-intensive work of NDIC's employees, which 
results in comprehensive analysis of seized documents and electronic 
equipment (computers, cell phones, etc.), has proven invaluable to 
law-enforcement officers and prosecutors throughout the United 
States. A testimony to their effectiveness in helping to obtain 
guilty pleas and convictions in major drug-trafficking cases is 
evidenced by the numerous letters received by NDIC from the agencies 
to which assistance was provided. These letters, written by assistant 
U.S. attorneys, local prosecutors and federal, state and local 
law-enforcement agencies, are received on a regular basis and contain 
effusive praise for the work and effort expended by NDIC analysts.

Unfortunately, these letters are not published in the media. It also 
should be noted that immediately after the tragic events of Sept. 11, 
2001, DOCEX, augmented by additional cross-trained NDIC personnel, 
deployed to the FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C., to analyze the 
documents and electronic media pertaining to all of the events that occurred.

The group, numbering at times in excess of 100, worked on this 
material for months before returning to Johnstown. No other 
law-enforcement or intelligence entity in the nation is capable of 
accomplishing this type of work. My experience as a supervisor with 
the intelligence division, which prepares strategic intelligence 
reports for the counter-drug community and other intelligence reports 
as requested, also was extremely positive. Members of this division 
labor somewhat in anonymity, and because they act as honest brokers 
of information received, sometimes receive kudos and jeers for the same report.

Their reports are prepared with a maximum of diligence and 
exactitude, and the jeers usually arise when a report contravenes a 
long-standing belief or uncovers a trend not previously recognized by 
law-enforcement entities, recognition of which, unfortunately, infers 
that the law-enforcement agencies in that area were not as diligent 
as they should have been.

The intelligence division also receives letters from agencies 
praising its efforts, but these, too, are unavailable for public 
consumption. The refrain heard in the media by the chorus of NDIC 
naysayers continues to defy the facts. All of the federal drug 
intelligence centers work in concert, and each has an individual 
responsibility. They work with each other by agreement among the 
agency leaders and by mandate of the General Counterdrug Intelligence 
Plan - the signatories of whom are the attorney general; secretaries 
of defense, treasury, state and transportation; and other 
Cabinet-level officials.

Are all of these federal officials acting in complicity with U.S. 
Rep. John Murtha and continually suborning the annual expenditure of 
millions of federal dollars on a useless, duplicative, make-work 
center in Johnstown? Of course not.

The drug intelligence centers routinely work together on a 
collaborative and collegial basis, and the defined responsibility or 
role of NDIC is to produce strategic intelligence reports, produce 
other reports as requested and provide document and computer 
exploitation services to the federal law-enforcement community.

NDIC is involved in other tangential efforts, providing intelligence 
and DOCEX training to law enforcement, but the core work is clearly 
defined. There is no duplication of effort among the centers. The 
constant media barrage against NDIC, most recently spearheaded by 
Rep. Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican who to my knowledge has never 
been to NDIC, nor has any firsthand knowledge of this agency, is 
difficult to comprehend unless seen in the light of petty partisan 
politics. Also, the constant argument and harping that NDIC's 
location in Pennsylvania is too far from Washington to be effective 
is fallacious. It is an easy three-hour drive away. Does anyone who 
puts forth this argument have a map of the United States?

A major DEA drug-intelligence center has been located in El Paso, 
Texas, since the 1970s. This center has operated effectively and 
efficiently for many years. Its distance from Washington has not been 
an impediment. As to NDIC's origin, the necessity for the agency and 
the unique role that it would play was the brainchild of the 
Republican administration of President George H.W. Bush, which 
determined that a strategic intelligence center would be required for 
the war on drugs. NDIC's opening came to fruition during the 
Demo-cratic Clinton administration.

Attorneys general in Democratic and Republican administrations have 
praised NDIC's work, and Attorneys General Janet Reno and John 
Ashcroft made official visits to the agency.

During Ashcroft's visit in August 2002, I spoke to him and heard him 
praise the work of NDIC's DOCEX and intelligence divisions. It is 
curious to note that the current Bush administration somehow decided 
that NDIC was redundant and unnecessary a few years ago, at about the 
same time that Murtha began to voice his concerns - which the 
administration clearly did not want to hear - about the situation in 
Iraq. This must be merely a coincidence since, as a taxpayer, I would 
think that the current administration always operates with the best 
interests of the general public in mind and would not try to cut off 
the funding of a vital national resource in the drug war merely to 
satisfy some petty partisan political vendetta.

I do not know whether the Bush administration or Rogers actually pays 
much attention to the war on drugs, but, in my assessment, it is at 
best - utilizing all of the resources available -  a holding action. 
For the Bush administration - if in fact this is what is occurring - 
to try to eliminate a national resource in the war on drugs for 
purely political purposes is unconscionable.

And if Rogers is serving as the point man in these efforts, as a 
former FBI special agent, he should be ashamed of his behavior. Is 
NDIC a perfect organization?

No. Nor is any other federal agency or organization. There have been 
growing pains. There also was an unfortunate instance of upper 
management malfeasance, which, although appropriately addressed by 
the Justice Department, garnered local press headlines.

None of this affected the constant, consistent effort of the NDIC 
work force to diligently complete its assigned responsibilities. 
Unfortunately, the persistent negative media attention relating to 
the possible removal of funding and closing of the center, through 
the efforts of the Bush administration and Republican legislators, 
affects the employees' morale, and this is unjust and unwarranted. 
The war on drugs is not a partisan issue; it affects all Americans. 
NDIC, because it is a small agency operating within the confines of a 
vocal Democratic congressman, should not continually be made the 
punching bag for Washington bureaucrats and for those who have no 
clue, nor seem to care, how the NDIC employees' efforts and hard work 
are assisting in the war on drugs.

The fact that the NDIC director is serving his country on active duty 
in Iraq with the Army Reserve and is not able to personally address 
the attacks on his beleaguered agency exacerbates even further the 
disgraceful efforts to disparage the work of the people at NDIC.

John T. Counihan spent 17 years as a special agent with the Drug 
Enforcement Administration in New York City before being assigned to 
the U.S. Embassy in Ottawa, Canada. While in Canada, he spent almost 
seven years as a DEA special agent (his title was assistant country 
attache) assigned to work on collaborative cross-border 
investigations with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. He retired in 
2004 as a supervisor with the National Drug Intelligence Center.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom