Talk:Special Activities Center/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Trump death squads... according to Buzzfeed

FIRM41 added multiple bare refs to the same Buzzfeed story through-out the article, then near the bottom, used the same ref to support the addition;

The Trump Administration increased it's use of SAD paramilitary officers in direct unilateral operations to kill terrorists worldwide. “It’s a small number where it has been kinetic, but it is happening,” said one source. “They are getting people on targeting lists. Small teams are locating and killing bad guys. That’s what we are doing.”

The links were modified by Kkuchnir, then I, at first, filled in and condensed the refs and copyedited the added content. But with further consideration, have reverted all of it out. The Buzzfeed story only mentions "unnamed sources", while adding that a CIA spokesperson, by name, denies the story. I also see that at numerous entries at WP:RSN, Buzzfeed has been challenged as a source and repeatedly found unreliable. I think that if/before this content gets re-added. it should be supported by more solid reliable sources. - ^theWOLFchild 20:43, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Division name

A couple of sources, noted here mention a "Special Activities Center" (SAC). One of them is "foreignpolicy.com" and another is "clearencejobs.com". They don't however, specifically mention that SAD has been renamed SAC. However, it seems Buzzfeed has picked up on this and declared that a name has indeed taken place. They have no attribution or mention any specific source to support the name change. It appears they picked up on the above noted foreignpolicy.com article and made an assumption. As mentioned above, Buzzfeed has been noted as not being a reliable source. A check around the internet (via Google) still shows SAD as being is use as the division's name and no mention of a name change. Until more reliable sources confirm that such a name change has occurred, I don't see how we can mention it in the article. - ^theWOLFchild 21:11, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi wolfchild. It says "Each covert action program is unique in its policy objectives, delegated authorities, and limitations — all of which are clearly spelled out in a written “finding” that is approved by the president and notified to Congress. The scope of a covert action can range from lethal paramilitary operations to more subtle efforts to influence public opinion through media contacts. The CIA traditionally assigned lead responsibility for conducting covert actions to a single area division or operational center that acted through selected overseas stations and drew upon infrastructure, relationships, and expertise maintained by the Special Activities Center (SAC)." paramilitary functions are now under special activities center and the rest of the article explains that they moved away from missions to centers. It is very clear. Also the memorial foundation says Special Activities Center. So they moved to centers vice division and there is something called Special Activities Center. It would not make sense they also have Special Activities Division. I agree most people still refer to it as Special Activities Division, so we should change the name but we should note the change. FIRM41 (talk) 22:19, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks again for the reply. Unfortunately, a lot of this appears to be largely conjectural. "Because of this, we should assume this. And then there is this.", etc. What we need is a solid, reliable source (more than one, preferably) that unambiguously states that SAD has been renamed SAC. It's clear that SAC exists, but we don't have enough info beyond that to determine it was formerly SAD and SAD no longer exists, or that they are one and the same. I understand this may seem clear and obvious to you, but it is still largely an assumption that we can't use. Another issue is WP:COMMONNAME. As you just wrote, "I agree most people still refer to it as Special Activities Division...", so that is what this entity will continue to be known as here, even if the name has officially changed. (Not a policy I always agree with, but we're stuck with it). Only if the name has officially been changed, there are reliable sources reporting it and it becomes more commonly used/known then the current name, could we then consider a change. Cheers - ^theWOLFchild 22:43, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Syria section

Needs revised given what we now know about Timber Sycamore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 133.7.7.240 (talk) 08:22, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

No US operations section.

SAD was involved in US operations as well with MERRIMAC - https://archive.org/details/CIA-Project-MERRIMAC/c00017771%20copy/page/n1/mode/2up Sephiroth storm (talk) 15:57, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Question on Drones

Should the CIA drone program be referenced on this page? Is this the unit that carries that out? Seems like it would be their Air Group.

Many articles and organizations claim that many civilians have been killed as a result of the program, others say it was very effective. Both vantage points should be included. My understanding is that it started under Bush, increased under Obama, increased a lot through Trump and is still going under Biden. They have happened all over the world to include Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya per the Long War Journal and numerous other media. So it seems notable enough to include.

Reports claim there has been an estimated 11k killed in Afghanistan, 1,500 killed in Somalia, 5,700 killed in Pakistan, 1,600 killed in Yemen.

The Trump Administration essentially loosened the restriction on the strikes of the Obama Administration, and the Biden Administration is still conducting them.

Or is it covered enough in other articles that it doesn't need to be included here? ManofWarandPeace (talk) 16:07, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

It's unknown if and how many drones Air Branch operates for kinetic purposes, it may not be an Air Branch thing at all. One of the few behind the scenes references I've seen is in Henry Crumptons book "The Art of Intelligence: Lessons from a Life in the CIA's Clandestine Service". He makes some mentions about the founding of the drone operations in general by CIA, which at least kicked off as an effort on part of the Counterterrorism Center, who housed and operated them originally ("drone program" can be misleading), although it's unknown if they still do and I haven't seen up to date references around that.

Further on quite a few occasions, some which we can identify from open sources; they make use of a certain process to temporarily ascertain operational control of military capabilities for activities the CIA conducts, on a few occasions this has included use of Air Force drones. It's relatively unknown how this works internally, probably the best in depth example is the Bin Laden raid, although even within that it's unknown how much control and oversight SAC itself had over the operation, just that GD was involved to some extent. While we can't speak to how that works in re drone operations, if we compare to other activities (like the Bin Laden raid), we still see that the military still actively participated when it came to using and implementing their capabilities. So, theoretically, it's entirely possible that the Air Force would just take targeting information from the CIA and conduct the actual strike themselves. InterstellarWinds (talk) 13:28, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Organizational references update + possible organization section?

First rodeo so apologies if this isn't put across in a top rate manner. Putting this here since it'd require some wider range editing rather than a one off piece. Some of the organizational references are a bit outdated and/or over extrapolated and could use some refinement. Given structuring, might also be worth an organization section like other pages about organizations?

"Covert Influence Group" was created sometime since 2016, some of the *believed* responsibilities of the Propaganda & Political Action Group were rehoused under CIG, those which can be corroborated are covert influence, covert psychological operations, covert propaganda, and covert dissemination and amplification of Mis- Dis- and Mal- information.(http://Https://www.yahoo.com/video/the-cia-sent-a-team-of-four-operators-on-a-spy-mission-targeting-china-none-came-back-090041816, https://www.businessinsider.com/the-top-5-non-military-us-special-operations-units-2020-11, https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/cia-challenge-coins-symbolism-and-dark-humor-can-be-had-for-a-price-on-ebay/2016/09/21/94e65cf4-7134-11e6-8365-b19e428a975e_story.html, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zyajcdjiA0).

"Foreign Training Group" existed in the early 2000s for sure, although, there's very little about it compared to SOG and nothing indicating it was closed or rehoused. Some of the activities Ground Department (fmr Branch) are believed to conduct or have conducted, were responsibilities of the Foreign Training Group. From what can be discerned from open sources, it appears FTGs responsibilities skewed more towards Foreign Internal Defense type mission sets. Their responsibility was more training and advising officials and official entities representative of recognized governments or militaries, rather than non state actors. (https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/washingtonpost/name/james-badey-obituary?id=6047597, https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna3340677)

This raises some editing required with different sections and paragraphs, such as edits around "Political Action Group" and identifying it may no longer exist. As well as light indications around SOG and some of their believed activities with the addition of FTG. Something much less covered by open sources also is the "Proprietary Management Staff" which, is not a unique name, but is an identifier used in a few places throughout the Agency. PMS in this context insinuates (and from few open sources, claims) they're the staff which handles proprietaries used for their purposes. Though there is a large lack of corroborating sources that could be used for SAC/PMS specifically.

Any critique, objections, etc? Not sure I'm confident enough to do it myself without some slip ups but would be happy to help one of you folks who actively handles the editing of these things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by InterstellarWinds (talk • contribs) 13:14, 16 April 2022 (UTC)