The North Pacific Intelligence Agency

Quick note, Roman. At the time of the Mesian affair (May 2007), Dalimbar was Delegate. Not an NPO plant. The government was functioning fine and had control of the region. Furthermore, any decleration of war dating from the takeover of TNP by TP would legally have died with the new constitution which was introduced in 2005. So, there shouldn't have been an active Declaration authorizing any such action. While not conclusive, an embassy existed between the two regions and relations were cordial, if not warm. By this time, even the ADN had recognized the government of The Pacific as legitimate, so I don't know where your whole "the NPO wasn't legitimate" thing is coming from. Perhaps you're getting confused about your facts. I don't want to derail this thread; I merely mentioned the Mesian affair to provide proof that under its old level of oversight (the same complete lack it has now), the NPIA did exceed its authority. The people ought to be able to expect that the people acting on their behalf won't do so again.

MCM's comments are mature and open-minded, and reflect the ideals and core values of both his campaign and this region. I look forward to working with him to create a balanced environment in which the NPIA can function fully as an intelligence organization, while remaining dutifully within the bounds of the constitution, as required by law.
 
Mesian and Daim were also sent to spy on LWU once. From what I can tell, it was purely for the lulz, although Mesian did try to get me convicted for treason that one time.

Oh, and who here remembers when The Lexicon declared war on The North Pacific because the NPIA sent an agent into their region to spy on them? Good times. NPIA always started such interesting controversies.
 
I have a question for you, Roman. I'd like your thoughts on this post: CLICK ME

You'll find it's a post you made. I don't care about most of it; it's old and boring. I do care about the bottom bit, the last paragraph. I'll quote it now:
But back on topic, If I were to ever seriously hear "Oh the NPIA has that information but you can't see it because the NPIA doesn't have to give it to you" I would be irrate to no end. I, for one, would want that information to be made public and it could be done so without causing any serious security threat if done correctly.
Click to expand...
Emphasis mine.

Your comments, sir?
 
I think we need to finish drafting a charter on this before people get too up tight about the whole situation.

Oversight sounds great... within certain limits.
 
Blue Wolf II:
Kingborough:
@COE and Gaspo; That would be the cabinet of the delegacy of Blue Wolf. I did say "the cabinet who reformed it" on purpose. I don't generally speak of my self in third person.
Click to expand...
If this is true, it was done without my knowledge, meaning that it wasn't the NPIA at all, but some illegal and non-government approved group.
Click to expand...
I must have misread McM - but it was most certainly not this Co6 in any case and I find it unlikely a Co6 that had Unibot on it would create the NPIA without him protesting so it must have been in between.
 
As I said, I think some oversight is fine but please keep it limited in order to not have too many leaks and not have 3 pages worth of commentary within a 48ish hour time frame.

I am an RA member and I don't feel I need to know everything and that I elect officials such as the delegate and Sec. Council to ensure the safety and continuation of this government.
 
Noone has suggested complete transparency or even significant transparency. All anyone's asked for is any oversight. There is none now; I think we can all (except Roman) agree that zero oversight is a bad thing.
 
Kingborough:
I must have misread McM - but it was most certainly not this Co6 in any case and I find it unlikely a Co6 that had Unibot on it would create the NPIA without him protesting so it must have been in between.
Click to expand...
My Cabinet didn't have a Co6 and in fact only consisted of three members, McMaster, Flem, and Gulliver. I doubt that one of these Ministers formed the NPIA on their own without my consent as Delegate, but you never know.
 
Blue Wolf II:
Kingborough:
I must have misread McM - but it was most certainly not this Co6 in any case and I find it unlikely a Co6 that had Unibot on it would create the NPIA without him protesting so it must have been in between.
Click to expand...
My Cabinet didn't have a Co6 and in fact only consisted of three members, McMaster, Flem, and Gulliver. I doubt that one of these Ministers formed the NPIA on their own without my consent as Delegate, but you never know.
Click to expand...
Lol that would have been hilarious XD.

Some don't obviously realize that the council was created during Eluvatar's delegacy. The decision to start the NPIA/write the charter was made in August like I said. Nothing was practically put in motion, until now.

Right now however, focus is on getting it members and having them take the oath.
 
Despite my experience, I don't expect my invitation will be coming anytime soon. Intelligence services tend not to like people who ask questions of them :P
 
To be clear, I am in the process of departing the UDL Chief of Intelligence role.

I have never put UDL interests ahead of TNP interests and don't intend to start now or anytime soon.

I am in fact resigning from the UDL Intelligence role not because of questions raised here but because I feel that given that my prime commitment intelligence wise will certainly be to the NPIA, it would be a disservice to the UDL to continue that role there.
 
Eluvatar:
To be clear, I am in the process of departing the UDL Chief of Intelligence role.

I have never put UDL interests ahead of TNP interests and don't intend to start now or anytime soon.

I am in fact resigning from the UDL Intelligence role not because of questions raised here but because I feel that given that my prime commitment intelligence wise will certainly be to the NPIA, it would be a disservice to the UDL to continue that role there.
Click to expand...
You have my full support.
 
I support the idea of full transparency for the NPIA. Then, while the front organisation is being fully transparent on the forum, the actual work should carry on off-site, unofficially, and away from prying eyes.

A true intel organisation cannot work effectively with public scrutiny, so I think my plan is the way forward.
 
Again, I've never wanted total public scrutiny. I've wanted any scrutiny. Complete outside-the-law lack of accountability is a recipe for disaster, in a region like TNP.
 
flemingovia:
I dunno. It worked pretty fine in TNP for a number of years.
Click to expand...
As far as we know, it did. Except oh wait, nothing has ever been declassified and noone has ever asked any questions. So it worked well for the NPIA, but we cannot say conclusively whether or not it "worked" for the citizenship of the region, or whether it "worked" under the constitution.
 
Gaspo:
Your post is all true from an operational standpoint, Roman. You also completely failed to address at least one massive controversy involving the NPIA, one which was never fully resolved. I know you know which one I'm talking about; it's that time the NPIA kinda sorta ordered someone to infiltrate The Pacific. Which wasn't a legal action to take. The government then spent a month dragging its heels until the issue went away. Your entire post completely sidestepped the issue of oversight. Noone is asking you to reveal your methods to the public. I'm not a moron; I understand the point of intelligence gathering. Real-world intelligence agencies in real-world governments structured as ours is, however, have limits placed on them which the public is aware of. The CIA can't conduct operations in the US; the NSA isn't supposed to be able to conduct surveillance of US citizens. The UK equivalents are similarly restricted.

The NPIA announcement listed above has no such guarantees, and you did not address those issues. There are no restrictions placed on the NPIA. Your statement that they are restricted to gathering intelligence is technically correct, but there are zero restrictions placed on how they get that intelligence. If the NPIA decides it wants to know what's going on in Osiris, or any of our other friendly regions, for example, there is nothing which presently bars them, as far as the public knows, from doing that.

Having an intelligence agency certainly requires that we trust our government, and I do. In exchange, well-intentioned governments typically restrict their actions, or explain in broad terms what they will, and will not, do. This government has made no effort to do such a thing, and has instead informed the citizenry of the region that an organization is being created, about which they cannot know anything, cannot ask anything, cannot question, and cannot have any assurances as to the intentions or legal restrictions of. That's a hell of a lot of trust to ask of us, given this region's tumultuous history, and it's a hell of a lot of trust to place in someone who, while being a great and trusted friend of mine, has a hell of a lot of loyalties which lie elsewhere as well as here. And our questions are being ignored. That, to me, is wrong.
Click to expand...
Actually the UK isn't as restricted. See: MI5.
 
I am also in support of full transparency.

Another step that can be taken is that the nominee for the NPIA be scrutinised and voted on by the RA before they assume the post.
 
Govindia:
I am also in support of full transparency.

Another step that can be taken is that the nominee for the NPIA be scrutinised and voted on by the RA before they assume the post.
Click to expand...
You're the only person in support of full transparency, so don't say "also".

Approval of nominee is...eh, a toss-up. It feels completely unnecessary.
 
Gaspo:
Govindia:
I am also in support of full transparency.

Another step that can be taken is that the nominee for the NPIA be scrutinised and voted on by the RA before they assume the post.
Click to expand...
You're the only person in support of full transparency, so don't say "also".

Approval of nominee is...eh, a toss-up. It feels completely unnecessary.
Click to expand...
Most people seem to support full transparency if I read correctly?
 
Govindia:
Gaspo:
Govindia:
I am also in support of full transparency.

Another step that can be taken is that the nominee for the NPIA be scrutinised and voted on by the RA before they assume the post.
Click to expand...
You're the only person in support of full transparency, so don't say "also".

Approval of nominee is...eh, a toss-up. It feels completely unnecessary.
Click to expand...
Most people seem to support full transparency if I read correctly?
Click to expand...
Most people support some transparency. Full transparency makes the idea of an Intelligence Agency pointless.
 
flemingovia:
I dunno. It worked pretty fine in TNP for a number of years.
Click to expand...
Except for that time they sent a spy into Lone Wolves United and The Lexicon for seemingly no reason, which caused The Lexicon to declare war on TNP when the NPIA denied outright that they sent a spy to Lex but confirmed they sent one to LWU. A flimsy denial too, since the IPs matched.

That war provoked a near successful coup plot, might I add.

But other than that, yeah, worked just great. :eyeroll:
 
Blue Wolf II:
flemingovia:
I dunno. It worked pretty fine in TNP for a number of years.
Click to expand...
Except for that time they sent a spy into Lone Wolves United and The Lexicon for seemingly no reason, which caused The Lexicon to declare war on TNP when the NPIA denied outright that they sent a spy to Lex but confirmed they sent one to LWU. A flimsy denial too, since the IPs matched.

That war provoked a near successful coup plot, might I add.

But other than that, yeah, worked just great. :eyeroll:
Click to expand...
I, for one, think we could use that kind of excitement :P
 
Full transparency implies publication of all operations, documents, rosters, and sources. Noone, at any stage, has proposed that.
 
I do not see the reason for all this debate. If you are wanting to set up a serious intel agency, the last thing you do is announce it publicly with an official document with a seal on top, a fanfare and a troupe of dancing girls. You simply set it up quietly and let it get on with the job, and if anyone notices they are not doing their job properly.
 
flemingovia:
I do not see the reason for all this debate. If you are wanting to set up a serious intel agency, the last thing you do is announce it publicly with an official document with a seal on top, a fanfare and a troupe of dancing girls. You simply set it up quietly and let it get on with the job, and if anyone notices they are not doing their job properly.
Click to expand...
Nice to know that the constitutional requirements for accountability and transparency are of such high importance to you. I know full transparency isn't feasible, but some small degree of accountability is in keeping with TNP's core principles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top