Replies

I think it is possible to presume that the cultures between the analytical wing and the operational wing of the Agency are different. I think one of the things Hayden always said he wanted to improve was the communication between the 2 Directorates of the Agency. I think you may also want to consider that many analysts at the Agency have academic backgrounds, where a short tour of duty is just another notch on their resume to climbing up the academic ladder. I wouldn't be surprised if these types often move on if they aren't getting good enough retention pay or if they get bored and want more variety of experience in their resume.

I don't know much about the author or about the book. I would take a close look at his background and whether he actually has good points to make, or if he's just another disgruntled ex-employee with an axe to grind. Although I will say that this statement he makes "While the CIA is unable to run effective human source operations, it has a raptorlike efficiency when it comes to defending itself and its growth," sounds like a ridiculous bit of hyperbole to me. And this idea he has: "...transferring foreign intelligence liaison carried out at U.S. embassies to the State Department. The FBI should take charge of the CIA's domestic activities..." also sound like pretty lame ideas.