While the painstaking process of unearthing the “systematic failures” of intelligence on the “underwear bomber” continues, Obama again performs on script. Just as he’s done with virtually every past crises – and always while armed with only the bare essentials of information – the now infamous POTUS finger of blame moves away from anyone remotely connected with Obama, his decisions or performance of his appointees, and falls once again on his favorite scapegoat, the CIA.
And the CIA spy chiefs are none to happy about the accusations. It seemed especially harsh when, in an apparent moment of political expedience, Obama was hailing the seven CIA agents slain by a suicide bomber at a US base in the eastern province of Khost 24 hours later.
One day the President is pointing the finger and blaming the intelligence services, saying there is a systemic failure,’ said one agency official. ‘Now we are heroes. The fact is that we are doing everything humanly possible to stay on top of the security situation. The deaths of our operatives shows just how involved we are on the ground.’
But CIA bosses claim they were unfairly blamed at a time the covert government agency has been stretched further than ever before in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
They point to the murder of seven operatives at a remote mountain base in Afghanistan’s Khost Province as an example of how agents are putting their lives on the line at the vanguard of America’s far-flung wars.
~~~Some CIA officials are angry at being criticised by the White House after Abdulmutallab, 23, was allowed to slip through the security net and board a US-bound flight in Amsterdam despite evidence he was a terror threat.
The president complained that a warning from the former London engineering student’s father and information about an al Qaeda bomb plot involving a Nigerian were not handled properly by the intelligence networks.But CIA officials say the data was sent to the US National Counterterrorism Centre in Washington, which was set up after the 9/11 attacks as a clearing house where raw data should be analysed.
Agents claim that is where the dots should have been connected to help identify Abdulmutallab as a threat.
The National Counterterrorism Center (aka NCTC) is a post 911 creation by President Bush’s EO# 13355 August 2004, subsequently codified by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA).
The Director of NCTC is a Deputy Secretary-equivalent with a unique, dual line of reporting: (1) to the President regarding Executive branch-wide counterterrorism planning, and (2) to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) regarding intelligence matters. NCTC follows the policy direction of the President, and National and Homeland Security Councils.
This means that the intel sharing buck now stops at the desk of retired Adm. Dennis Blair, Obama’s appointee as Director of National Intelligence, and the honcho who oversees the sharing of intel between the 16 intelligence agencies.
The interagency blame game eminates from Obama accusations that the CIA did not pass along complete information that would result in a “red flag” being raised. On Dec 29th, CNN reported what can only be construed as preliminary talking points obtained from “sources” (aka WH mouthpieces…?) insisting that CIA Langley headquarters received the information, then it “…sat there for five weeks and was not disseminated.”
However the CIA insists that a cable was sent to the NCTC in November, containing any and all information that could have put the underwear bomber on a no-fly list via interagency instructions.
According to CNN’s Jeanne Meserve, the father of the Christmas bomber Umar Farouk AbdulMutallab, spoke to a CIA official with the Nigerian embassy about the concerns he had with his son’s disappearance, extremists views and ties to radicals in Yemen. The father, a former Nigerian banker, met with embassy officials at least once and also made several phone calls. A report was created on AbdulMutallab; the 23-year-old Nigerian and delivered to CIA headquarters, but the full contents of the report was not disseminated to other agencies, according to a source.
However, State Department spokesman Ian Kelly pushed back against the claim that the CIA sat on information that could have prevented the attempted bombing:
“State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said department staff did what they were supposed to have done by sending a cable to the National Counterterrorism Center in Washington about the matter. Kelly said any decision to have revoked the suspect’s visa would have been an interagency decision.”
The cable reportedly contained AbdulMutallab’s name, passport number and possible connection to extremists. “I’m not aware of a magic piece of intelligence somehow withheld that would have put AbdulMutallab on the no-fly list,” an official told CNN.
The National Counterterrorism Center claims that the CIA cable contained nothing that would have alerted officials to place AbdulMutallab on the no fly list. Out of hundreds of alerts the Counterterrorism Center receives each day, the cable on the Nigerian Christmas bomber apparently did not raise a red flag.
President Obama said on Tuesday that a red flag should have been raised. “Even without this one report, there were bits of information available within the intelligence community that could have and should have been pieced together, said Obama.
CBS News reported that as far back as August 2009, “the Central Intelligence Agency was picking up information on a person of interest dubbed “The Nigerian,” suspected of meeting with “terrorist elements” in Yemen.” CIA officials did not connect the information to the “underwear bomber” Abudulmutallab, until after the attempted bombing of Flight 253, with about 3 ounces of a powerful explosive hidde inside a pair of specially-made underwear.
Obama believes that had the full CIA report been shared with other agencies, the Nigerian bomber may have, at the very least, been given greater scrutiny that may have prevented the 23-year-old terrorist from boarding the plane in Amsterdam bound for the United States:
“Had this critical information been shared, it could been compiled with other intelligence, and a fuller, clearer picture of the suspect would have emerged. The warning signs would have triggered red flags, and the suspect would have never been allowed to board that plane for America,” said Obama in his speech delivered from his vacation in Hawaii.
While the CIA admits they did not forward on the full file of “the Nigerian”, it was not until after the attack that “the Nigerian” and the underwear bomber were positively ID’d as one and the same. This does not negate that absolute specifics of a potential terrorist… including his name, passport and key biographical information – was sent on the the NCTC more than a month before the Christmas attack.
“We learned of him in November, when his father came to the U.S. embassy in Nigeria and sought help in finding him. We did not have his name before then,” said Paul Gimigliano, a CIA spokesman. “Also in November, we worked with the embassy to ensure he was in the government’s terrorist database – including mention of his possible extremist connections in Yemen. We also forwarded key biographical information about him to the National Counterterrorism Center. This agency, like others in our government, is reviewing all data to which it had access – not just what we ourselves may have collected – to determine if more could have been done to stop Abdulmutallab.”
Obama is quick to lay blame on the CIA, despite their timely forwarding of risk specifics. The POTUS is also just as quick to ignore that the same information did not get relayed properly from his appointee to both his own office and Napolitano… the ultimate buck stop desks. This is yet another CYA moment for a naive CiC…. an obvious desperate attempt to draw focus away from his choices of appointees and the failures of his administration.
But friction between this POTUS and the CIA isn’t new… He didn’t win the hearts and minds of our own intelligence community when he declassified memos on CIA interrogation methods yet refused to release subsequent memos that noted success of thwarted attacks while simultaneously promising CIA agents immuity from prosecution.
Again, within 24 hours, the forked tongue POTUS was busy shifting blame for the false promises. In the lies about “immunity”, Obama deflected the blame to Holder.
Senior members of the Bush administration who approved the use of waterboarding and other harsh interrogation measures could face prosecution, President Obama disclosed today .
He said the use of torture reflected America “losing our moral bearings”.
He said his attorney general, Eric Holder, was conducting an investigation and the decision rested with him. Obama last week ruled out prosecution of CIA agents who carried out the interrogation of suspected al-Qaida members at Guantánamo and secret prisons around the world.
But for the first time today he opened up the possibility that those in the administration who gave the go-ahead for the use of waterboarding could be prosecuted.
That was April… by September, investigations and broken promises were well underway – with Holder taking the heat instead of the POTUS. Either this President is a manipulated puppet figure, or the liar. But then… this is becoming a pattern with this President.
When it comes to accessible information, Obama is busy either releasing selective data, or locking it away… whichever proves to be more politically expedient for his image. As Wordsmith pointed out only yesterday, WH officials, pouring thru the Bush archives to find intel failures, is fair game if it helps the press focus anywhere other than his own admin’s failures. It will, however, be difficult to find Bush failures that lessen the blow to Obama’s national security credentials since events like the underwear bomber or the shootings at Ft. Hood simply didn’t happen post 911.
Obama’s assault on the CIA goes back even further… with a jr. Senator on record… Congressional Record most specifically… in putting the CIA on notice. In an ironic choice of date – Pearl Harbor Day – then Sen. Obama and professional POTUS campaigner lambasted the CIA over the destruction of videotape, and suggested that the CIA felt themselves to be above the law.
Mr. President, this incident deserves further congressional oversight and inquiry – neither the CIA nor this interrogation program is immune to our laws. This is yet another chapter in a dark period in our constitutional history. Now, it is time to turn the page. That is why I was heartened to learn that the House and Senate Intelligence Committees have reached agreement on including a requirement in the Intelligence Authorization bill that subjects CIA interrogators to the guidelines on interrogation included in the U.S. Army Field Manual. It would be a grave disappointment – though not surprising – if this important step forward were subject to a veto threat from the President. That must not deter the Congress from moving forward. We have a responsibility to act.
To make this pompous speech on a day of infamy is particularly arrogant. For I’m willing to bet that any US official and citizen would be quick to give the nod of approval to waterboard any suspect, or play loud music 24/7, if it prevented the deaths at Pearl Harbor.
From the actions and behavior of this POTUS… constantly deflecting blame to others at every avenue… we have learned two things.
First: There is nothing he is willing to take responsibility for directly. That’s why he has appointed lackeys.
Second: Obama’s choice of enemies should be harshly called into question. While he limits any sparse references of “war” with the global Islamic jihad movement to just AQ, he appears to be waging an all out war with our own intelligence agencies. This is a CiC who needs his priorities straightened out in the worst way.
Vietnam era Navy wife, indy/conservative, and an official California escapee now residing as a red speck in the sea of Oregon blue.
Don’t get mad, get even. Call Glen Beck, and start talking.
A Pompous statement from a pompous no nothing Ass
I have no sympathy for the CIA after the garbage they pulled with the Bush administration.
@Blake, the only thing that stands between your arse and a terrorist attack is the CIA. So forgive me if I mentally toss your comment into the garbage bin as being nothing more than arrogant self-righteous stupidity.
I will repeat… I heartily believe that if the deaths of Pearl Harbor could have been prevented with what we know of waterboarding today (done as part of our training for our own soldiers) and 24/7 blasting of music, most of America would have been just fine with it.
Mata,
I didn’t say the CIA isn’t important, I merely said they don’t deserve my sympathy.
They played politics against the Bush administration and now they’ve got their collective panties in a wad over statements President Obama made.
So, again, who is being arrogant, self-righteous and stupid? Looked in the mirror recently?
Blake, you want to to place blame upon the CIA for something they *did* do (or in your opinion they did), that’s one thing. To profess lack of sympathy for being a scapegoat for something they did not do is… IMHO… self-righteous and stupid. Not to mention the stuff that’s equivalent to schoolyard mentality.
Intelligence agents are human, and fallible. They are also unheralded workers that do nothing more than insure the safety of we Americans. They deserve your support when they are accused of failures that were not of their doing. They also deserve your support for taking personal risks to, again, protect your sorry butt based upon the legal advisement of their superiors. No doubt you will be celebrating the in absentia conviction of CIA agents in Italy as well.
Mata,
I’m willing to discuss this, if you want.
You want to name call, we can do that too.
Take your pick.
Mata,
Look, it’s well documented that the CIA played political games and undercut the Bush administration regarding the WOT.
See Powerline for example: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2004/09/007911.php
Also, see here: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=21538
Now, the CIA is crying foul because the current administration is using the CIA as scapegoats.
If the CIA didn’t have a recent history of playing political games, I’d agree and think it’s undeserved.
The CIA cannot have it both ways. The CIA cannot undercut an administration they don’t like and then turn around and cry foul when the succeeding administration uses them as a political football.
Again you engage in schoolyard mentality, Blake. Because you have a problem with the CIA in general (as opposed to individuals who may be bad apples), you are willing to allow them to take any flake for events where they are not at fault.
I don’t “discuss” nor debate with such a vindictive, anything goes, mentality. Period. They are not at fault here. Period.
Mata,
Look, you sophomoric dimwit, I offered to discuss this with you in a reasonable manner.
I’ve made a decent case and rather than rebut, you immediately descend into schoolyard bullying and name calling.
So, you’re okay with the CIA undercutting the previous administration, but despise the Obama administration so much, you’re willing to give the CIA a break in this case.
Got it, I understand, Mata. You lack the self-awareness to understand the inconsistency of your position.
Let me get this straight… I discuss the value of Fiji apples. You come back with something about Mackintosh apples and how they made you break out in hives, therefore all apples are bad.
And I’m sophomoric?
You have not been “reasonable” since comment #1 by you. We all get your drift, Blake. The CIA doesn’t deserve your “sympathy” because you don’t like what they did years ago…. forget what happened in the past few days and their apt due diligence now. There’s no pats on the back from you because you’ll forever judge them from yesterday.
Go find a 5′ slide and like kind mentality that haunts it to bother, Blake.
@Blake:
It appears that you’re struggling with the “two wrongs don’t make a right” concept.
Blake,
Typical of the Left Obots to blame CIA and others instead of TAKING RESPONSIBILITY WHEN THEIR LEADER IS AT THE HELM.
CIA is not the issue especially if Obama the Usurper in Chief is in charge of them. The bucks stop with Obama, end of blaming. Blake.
To much is given, much is required.
He asked for the position, if he can’t take the heat he needs to get his ass out of the kitchen.
I don’t care who is up there. If it is under your watch, YOU ARE FREAKIN RESPONSIBLE.
“stopblaming”, just to clarify Blake is not a liberal. He’s upset that the CIA powerhouses made many moves to undercut Bush and his attempts to reign in the global Islamic jihad movements. I am not unsympathetic to that complaint.
My problem with Blake is not supporting the CIA when they *are* performing up to snuff on the intel sharing simply because of past deeds. I will not stoop to calling him a “liberal”. Merely self-righteous in carrying an unwarranted grudge that doesn’t do the nation’s security any bit of good.
No one steals an election…
No one steals an election to do good
Security at the “Crotch Bomber” airports, including Detroit and other American airports, run by Israeli Company: (See #10 down in the middle and the comments).
http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/
The intelligence system in general had a serious failure. Fast action from a couple of passengers saved 288 people.
Accusations from the CEO are a continuation of a perpetual display of narcissism. Narcissism cannot accept responsibility for mistakes, and absolutely cannot accept responsibility for incompetence or abject failure. Other than diehard believers, how can anyone with common sense comprehend actions of this White House?
Is anyone else getting tired of hearing the President say he “WILL NOT REST UNTIL . . . ”
He applies that line to people finding jobs, and applies it to finding “all who were involved” in this security failure, . . . then he goes back to golf or his absolute favourite pastime – flying on Airforce One heading to a daily very personal encounter with his teleprompter.
Abdulmutallab is not an extremist, he is a terrorist on an Islamic jihad, who will have his Miranda rights read to him as per Obama’s dictates and executive orders.
Is there something really NOT RIGHT with ALL the decisions emanating from this White House, or is it just fog?
Sorry about that, got called away.
I hate it when Mom calls me out of the basement when I’m in the midst of my best ninja keyboard warrior routine.
(For all you liberals out there, that’s a joke..I’m really the fat guy in skivvies surrounded by mountains of empty pizza boxes and mountain dew as I shop and chat online)
Mata,
First, some rules..if things get out of hand and we decide to engage in fisticuffs at a certain place and time…winner of said fisticuffs buys the beer afterward.
@Aye Chihuahua,
You see it as two wrongs don’t make a right, I see it as the CIA wanting to have it both ways.
@Mata,
Moving your way just a bit, I do agree the CIA did not deserve to have this administration disparage them at this time due to the CIA recently taking casualties in Afghanistan. (of course, the appalling amateurism of the current administration is an entirely different subject)
I would also say my position is not set in stone. Were it 2 or three years down the road, I could back the CIA.
For me, it’s a bit too soon for a lot of sympathy, because we’re less than a year from the previous administration.
Are there, as some conspiracy theorists suggest, really two factions in the CIA working against each other? Or do they drop the ball because, being secretive and hidden and all that, it is impossible to share information efficiently? Maybe some go rogue because of buying into a god trip. Opinions?
Haha…Blake, this picture comes to mind:
I think both Blake and Mata have legitimate points (my apologies in advance for only skimming through here; so I hope I don’t misconstrue their positions).
The CIA has been dysfunctional for a long time. Through the 90’s, the Agency became more and more risk-averse, appointing DO operators who had never been field agents themselves; out of touch like career politicians, concerned more with political-correctness than with the actual business of gathering intelligence.
And during the Bush years, I think there were those in the Agency who did some harm in undermining the White House out of political differences.
Mata also is right in saying that those who go into the CIA are heroes trying to keep us safe. The first casualty in Afghanistan was Mike Spann. And of course we had the recent deaths in Afghanistan. These agents risk their lives to protect our country.
I think what the difference is between Bush and Obama in their relationship with dealing with the CIA is that Obama is fingering blame at the CIA. Contrast that with Bush’s reassurance after 9/11, that he wasn’t going to finger-point blame; that he needed the Agency to not wallow in guilt and embarrassment over intelligence failures but to get to work right away.
Pg 62 of Ronald Kessler’s The Terrorist Watch:
That’s the difference.
Bush is about leadership and getting the job taken care of. Obama is about me, me me, appearances, and protecting his legacy as the 2nd coming of MLK-JFK.
@Wordsmith,
Not bad, though the guy in the picture is a bit more svelte.
@Wordsmith,
I think you’ve done a good summation of my position.
@Pat,
I’d say there are two factions in the CIA, however, they don’t necessarily intentionally work against each other.
As our thread host has point out, there are some very good people in the CIA, some of whom recently lost their lives doing battle on the front lines.
However, there are also the CIA CYA desk jockeys who are only interested in protecting and expanding their turf. The CYA desk jockeys only look after their careers and intelligence is only useful to them as long as it moves their career forward.
As a wise man once said: “Never ascribe conspiracy to that which can be explained by incompetence.”
@Blake #18 and #19…. ROTFLMAO! Glad to see your sense of humor… and sense of fair play… emerge. That’s all I wanted to hear, guy. INRE the brew… I’ll buy you one, and hope you shall do the same for me over a game of 9-ball.
As I said, not unsympathetic to your justified annoyance at their prior faux pas via the leadership. But they behaved well in this case, and I’ll have their backs for doing so. And I do honor their service in general. We have bad apples everywhere…. Pentagon, military, Congress and at all points in leadership. Hang, can’t say as I’m the least bit fond of Panetta. Speaking of…. have you heard him coming out and defending his own?? But of course not… scum bag.
But I appreciate the change in tone, Blake. I knew we weren’t on complete opposite sides. Guess we just had “a failure to communicate”, yes?
Mata,
That’s a good point about Panetta. I’d forgotten that twit should have been out in front defending his guys.
But, of course, Panetta is a political animal.
Enough said.
Okay on the 9 ball. We won’t play for beer, though, as I’m not much of a pool player. (understatement of the year)
I’d rather hit the range, pop off a few rounds and head for a beer after.
Mata,
Nah, we were never on opposite sides. We’re both appalled at the politicization of the WOT.
Cheney laid it out very well. The current administration refuses to take the WOT seriously.
Just stumbled into this forum for the first time. I’ve enjoyed reading the good-natured back and forth banter here. I shall visit more often.
Everybody knows that organizations rot from the top. The 9/10 mentality that BamBam has been broadcasting worldwide is what is wrong.
Like the new year, BamBam isn’t really ready for an important job.
What does he have to show for his world apology tours but a whole lot of CO2?
Obama is still doing the on-the-job trainning on how to act like a president. That means that the terrorist will continue to attack our country. And Obama will continue to blame others for his short comings. When it’s not Bush or Cheney it will be anybody that’s convenient, but surely not himself. His plan to prosecute those in the Bush administration for allowing waterboarding is another blunder this idiot will never understand, it will open the doors to mass terrorism in this country.
Now they’re blaming MI5, too. Of course, if the intelligence agencies reported on all disaffected young men with questionable “friends” Obambi wouldn’t stack up so well, either, would he?
Now be nice!!! You can’t blame Obama… He don’t like em because someone told Him CIA stood for Conservative Intelligence Agency.. so NATURALLY he had to slam and vilify them!! LOL!!!
And MATA…Panetta “defending his own”?? You got to remember he is a political flunky (read WEASEL) he is NOT “CIA”, he’s a guy that sits at a desk and does what the boss tells him.. today it’s CIA, tomorrow???? The mans forte was budget issues and some environmental stuff,, and Law/Legal Firm work…… WHERE does anyone see QUALIFICATIONS to run a, well call it what it is, a SPY and Intel gathering operation!! Guy is a stooge and flunky…. has no background in it…. so what do you expect from him..LOYALTY??? He’s loyal to himself and the machine that pays him…. currently, the DEMOCRATIC machine… and that’s too bad, because we need a SAVVY CAREER guy in there…. not a “trainee”!!!