Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 240 is Back on May 21, 2009, 05:54:50 AM
-
Cheney, with his epic 13% approval rating, will be speaking on behalf of the Repubs, following Obama speaking on the topic of terror and the wars.
He and a large group of invite-only repubs w ill watch obama's speech on the big screen. Then he'll give his own speech.
The Dems gotta be loving this. Instead of seeing some fresh-faced 2012 potential like pawlenty or Romney or huck or Barbour giving the speech, they have Darth Vader, one of the most hated men on earth, speaking for this party. Cheney is even better than Rush, in the libs' eyes, as the face of the GOP.
-
Cheney is a proven liar that has no credibility at all anyway. Let me speak, vast majority of America has tuned out to anything he wants to whine about.
-
The differance will be Chenney kept Americans safe for the last 7.5 years while Obama has to rely on his community organising to come up with a policy.This is a battle of an incredible lightweight in Obama vs. a guy that knows more then Obama will ever know.
-
The differance will be Chenney kept Americans safe for the last 7.5 years
Cheney doesn't want to talk about that first year, huh? ;)
-
The only thing Cheney knows how to do is LIE.
-
Cheney doesn't want to talk about that first year, huh? ;)
Hmmm,so your blaming Chenney for the attack after 9 months in office? When Obamas 9 months in office are up are you going to blame him when the economy is still tanking?Or is this selective blaming going on.
-
Economy tanked under Bush's term. Not Obama's.
-
Economy tanked under Bush's term. Not Obama's.
Its gotten MUCH worse under Obama.Is it his fault?Unemployment up,housing down etc etc.
-
Hmmm,so your blaming Chenney for the attack after 9 months in office? When Obamas 9 months in office are up are you going to blame him when the economy is still tanking?Or is this selective blaming going on.
I hope someone remembers to bump this thread in 9 months. :)
-
Hmmm,so your blaming Chenney for the attack after 9 months in office?
Bush and company were giving a memo 6 weeks before the attacks that pretty much told them what was gonna happen.
They chose to ignore it. Why?
-
Cheney is a proven liar that has no credibility at all anyway. Let me speak, vast majority of America has tuned out to anything he wants to whine about.
We got Coach and Beach Bum here, don't forget. ;)
-
Bush and company were giving a memo 6 weeks before the attacks that pretty much told them what was gonna happen.
They chose to ignore it. Why?
This is left wing liberal nonsense.Just like when you a-holes say 9-11 was an inside job.Like the incompetant government could keep that a secret.They couldnt even keep Barry Bonds' grand jury testimony a secret but could have hundreads tell the same lie.STOP WATCHING A-HOLE like Olberman.
-
This is left wing liberal nonsense.
So Condi Rice was lying when she testified about the memo and Bush's lack of interest in it?
-
This is left wing liberal nonsense.
wait, there was no Aug 5th memo?
Condi admitted it. Is she a CT nut also?
-
The differance will be Chenney kept Americans safe for the last 7.5 years while Obama has to rely on his community organising to come up with a policy.This is a battle of an incredible lightweight in Obama vs. a guy that knows more then Obama will ever know.
Cheney is a Jack ass and a liar. "He" didn't keep America safe for 7.5 years. America got attacked in 2001 and it made moves to prevent another attack involving hundreds of thousands of people and billions of dollars much of it wasted in Iraq. It wouldn't have mattered who was president when 9/11 occurred, the same thing would have happened, except maybe the colossal WMD lie.
-
It wouldn't have mattered who was president when 9/11 occurred, the same thing would have happened
Do you think Obama, upon being handed a memo labeled "Bin laden determined to attack" with details, would have ignored it?
Do you think his Sec of State Clinton, National security advisor, and other heads would have all ignored the document as well?
-
I hope someone remembers to bump this thread in 9 months. :)
Dont you read Bloomberg or CNBC????
The economy is getting far worse, not better.
-
Dont you read Bloomberg or CNBC????
The economy is getting far worse, not better.
Jag has been smoking too many green shoots.
-
Jag has been smoking too many green shoots.
Some of the posters on this board amaze me with their willfull ignorance about what is going on with the economy.
-
Do you think Obama, upon being handed a memo labeled "Bin laden determined to attack" with details, would have ignored it?
Do you think his Sec of State Clinton, National security advisor, and other heads would have all ignored the document as well?
First off you should post exactly what was said with links. You have a tendency to spin and embellish.
Second, we don't know what other intel they were receiving or the amount of other intel they were receiving. Intelligence agencies process thousands of bits of info per day. Aside from obtaining intel, deciding which in a real threat and which is not has to be a tough challange.
Thirdly, I was referring to what a president would have done after 9/11 regardless of who it was.
-
wait, there was no Aug 5th memo?
Condi admitted it. Is she a CT nut also?
Of course. Condi is part of the far left liberal media nonsense. She made that court appearance just to .. just to... well, why? Risk perjury just to make up some far left nonsense? Way to go Condi. ::)
-
First off you should post exactly what was said with links. You have a tendency to spin and embellish.
Second, we don't know what other intel they were receiving or the amount of other intel they were receiving. Intelligence agencies process thousands of bits of info per day. Aside from obtaining intel, deciding which in a real threat and which is not has to be a tough challange.
Thirdly, I was referring to what a president would have done after 9/11 regardless of who it was.
Hope this helps.
Note the final paragraphs.
The following is a transcript of the August 6, 2001, presidential daily briefing entitled Bin Laden determined to strike in US. Parts of the original document were not made public by the White House for security reasons.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/79/CIA_Memo.JPG)
-
Pwnage!
-
Thirdly, I was referring to what a president would have done after 9/11 regardless of who it was.
Okay.
Would Obama sit in a classroom reading a childrens book for 8 minutes after being given the news?
If the taleban offered to deliver Bin Laden dead or alive to America - provided we delivered evidence of his involvement as condi promised the sunday after 911 - would Obama have accepted?
-
Hope this helps.
Note the final paragraphs.
The following is a transcript of the August 6, 2001, presidential daily briefing entitled Bin Laden determined to strike in US. Parts of the original document were not made public by the White House for security reasons.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/79/CIA_Memo.JPG)
Does this document say where they will strike? When? How?
Does it say 19 hijackers are going to board these 4 Air planes, on this day on these flight numbers and then smash them into these buildings?
I couldn't read it very well, because my screen is crap here. But it only said OBL wanted to strike the USA. So does half the middle east.
Hope this helps.
Oh yeah, and it doesn't help at all because form an intelligence and prevention stand point, that memo is about as ambiguous as it gets.
-
Hope this helps.
Note the final paragraphs.
The following is a transcript of the August 6, 2001, presidential daily briefing entitled Bin Laden determined to strike in US. Parts of the original document were not made public by the White House for security reasons.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/79/CIA_Memo.JPG)
Thats funny as shit.Christ,Ollie North predicted he would strike this country in the 80s.Did the memo give a time,a place,a date,how?No,it gave nothing.Clinton knew this man was a threat,Bush one knew it,the whole world knew it.What was to be done about it?Bill Clinton could have gotten him and let him go.Why not blame him?Hope that helps.
-
german ambassador said in german paper that he wanted bush personally about 5 of the bad guys, the attack date being the 10th or 11th, and the means.
it ran in ger newspaper right after 911.
-
Okay.
Would Obama sit in a classroom reading a childrens book for 8 minutes after being given the news?
If the taleban offered to deliver Bin Laden dead or alive to America - provided we delivered evidence of his involvement as condi promised the sunday after 911 - would Obama have accepted?
I don't know what that has to do with my statement.
Regarding your statement here: I donno. Ask Obama.
-
Okay.
Would Obama sit in a classroom reading a childrens book for 8 minutes after being given the news?
If the taleban offered to deliver Bin Laden dead or alive to America - provided we delivered evidence of his involvement as condi promised the sunday after 911 - would Obama have accepted?
If he didnt have his teleprompter he probably would have stuttered and stammered like he always does.UMMMMM,HUUUUHHH,UMMMMM.
-
August 6, 2001: Bush Administration Warned 'Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States'
April 8, 2004
Two and a half years after 9/11, the American public learned today that President Bush received explicit warnings that Osama bin Laden was planning to attack the United States – including activities "consistent with preparations for hijacking." Yet, there was no domestic follow-up by the Bush administration. No high level meetings. No sense of urgency. No warnings to FBI agents across the country.
We now know why the Bush administration has been hiding the Aug. 6, 2001, intelligence briefing for the president, called "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States." All of the 9/11 Commission members – Republicans and Democrats – have asked the Bush administration to declassify this document. There are precedents for releasing presidential daily briefings and the American public deserves to know what President Bush knew and when.
We also learned that there appears to have been no response to explicit and repeated warnings about al Qaeda attacks. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice's claim that the FBI sent warnings to field offices was directly disputed by commissioners who said they had conducted thousands of interviews and reviewed thousands of documents. Their conclusion: no one at the FBI can recall such orders.
Today's hearing also confirmed evidence that the administration had done little or nothing to combat the terrorist threat between Jan. 20, 2001, and Sept. 10, 2001. Rice repeatedly used the claim that the administration was developing a "strategic approach" as an excuse for not acting. There was no response to the bombing of the USS Cole that claimed 17 American lives and the administration tried to cut counterterrorism funding.
Daily Talking Points is a product of the Center for American Progress, a non-partisan research and educational institute committed to progressive principles for a strong, just and free America.
-
August 6, 2001: Bush Administration Warned 'Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States'
April 8, 2004
Two and a half years after 9/11, the American public learned today that President Bush received explicit warnings that Osama bin Laden was planning to attack the United States – including activities "consistent with preparations for hijacking." Yet, there was no domestic follow-up by the Bush administration. No high level meetings. No sense of urgency. No warnings to FBI agents across the country.
We now know why the Bush administration has been hiding the Aug. 6, 2001, intelligence briefing for the president, called "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States." All of the 9/11 Commission members – Republicans and Democrats – have asked the Bush administration to declassify this document. There are precedents for releasing presidential daily briefings and the American public deserves to know what President Bush knew and when.
We also learned that there appears to have been no response to explicit and repeated warnings about al Qaeda attacks. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice's claim that the FBI sent warnings to field offices was directly disputed by commissioners who said they had conducted thousands of interviews and reviewed thousands of documents. Their conclusion: no one at the FBI can recall such orders.
Today's hearing also confirmed evidence that the administration had done little or nothing to combat the terrorist threat between Jan. 20, 2001, and Sept. 10, 2001. Rice repeatedly used the claim that the administration was developing a "strategic approach" as an excuse for not acting. There was no response to the bombing of the USS Cole that claimed 17 American lives and the administration tried to cut counterterrorism funding.
Daily Talking Points is a product of the Center for American Progress, a non-partisan research and educational institute committed to progressive principles for a strong, just and free America.
The question is: "where they warned about "THE" attacks on 9/11?"
The answer "STILL" no.
HTH
-
The differance will be Chenney kept Americans safe for the last 7.5 years while Obama has to rely on his community organising to come up with a policy.This is a battle of an incredible lightweight in Obama vs. a guy that knows more then Obama will ever know.
How the fuck can you make that statement? The BIGGEST terrorist attack in the countrys history happened on THEIR WATCH... Cheney and Bush ignored the memos from the CIA "Terrorists due to attack using airliners".. Pull your head out of your ass... Cheney is going to get prosecuted... The FACTS show they already had the evidence from the detainees... Cheney had them waterboarded to make them confess a connection from 9-11 and Iraq...
-
Hmmm,so your blaming Chenney for the attack after 9 months in office? When Obamas 9 months in office are up are you going to blame him when the economy is still tanking?Or is this selective blaming going on.
LOL
-
This is left wing liberal nonsense.Just like when you a-holes say 9-11 was an inside job.Like the incompetant government could keep that a secret.They couldnt even keep Barry Bonds' grand jury testimony a secret but could have hundreads tell the same lie.STOP WATCHING A-HOLE like Olberman.
THis is why you cant argue with Right wingers... they IGNORE FACTS... here is Condy TESTIFYING...
-
How the fuck can you make that statement? The BIGGEST terrorist attack in the countrys history happened on THEIR WATCH... Cheney and Bush ignored the memos from the CIA "Terrorists due to attack using airliners".. Pull your head out of your ass... Cheney is going to get prosecuted... The FACTS show they already had the evidence from the detainees... Cheney had them waterboarded to make them confess a connection from 9-11 and Iraq...
DO YOU WANT TO BET MONEY ON HIS PROSECUTION?In fact,here is a bet,Pelosi will go to jail before Cheney ever will.
-
DO YOU WANT TO BET MONEY ON HIS PROSECUTION?In fact,here is a bet,Pelosi will go to jail before Cheney ever will.
Pelosi will never go to jail either
-
Cheney and Bush ignored the memos from the CIA "Terrorists due to attack using airliners".. P
OzmO just had almost a full page discussion on this, but you choose to just make a statement like it didn't happen. Posts should further the discussion at hand, not return it to the starting point.
-
Pelosi will never go to jail either
That was sarcastic as in Chenney will NEVER be prosecuted.
-
We don't know the exact intelligence that was known but that above document is extremely vague and means almost nothing. If you are using that document to say we should have somehow prevented 911, thats way off.
-
We don't know the exact intelligence that was known but that above document is extremely vague and means almost nothing. If you are using that document to say we should have somehow prevented 911, thats way off.
So far, 240's assertion seems baseless and TA's support material empty
-
As has been proven many times on this site, both sides ignore facts.
Mr busted.
As for the intelligence committee that reports to the senate.
It was stacked with both Republican and democrats.
9-11 happened for many reasons but the main reasons are monitoring not allowed on any of the suspected terrorists, the competing interests in both the CIA and FBI caused information to go missing and much of the information was not allowed to be shared because of the existing laws at that time.
-
9-11 happened for many reasons but the main reasons are monitoring not allowed on any of the suspected terrorists, the competing interests in both the CIA and FBI caused information to go missing and much of the information was not allowed to be shared because of the existing laws at that time.
Can you elaborate more on this?
Why weren't the terrorists monitored? There was something about some order actually removing surveilance from Atta and friends in Hollywood, FL?
-
I would recommend the 9-1 commission report which outlines plenty of this.
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
Plus there was a good documentary from the CIA about failed intelligence before 9-11 on PBS.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/spyfactory/hill.html
-
Can you elaborate more on this?
Why weren't the terrorists monitored? There was something about some order actually removing surveilance from Atta and friends in Hollywood, FL?
weird you have detailed responses with cites for anything discussed...
but when you're given a Q like this, you deliver a vague 1000 page document.
-
weird you have detailed responses with cites for anything discussed...
but when you're given a Q like this, you deliver a vague 1000 page document.
We all know where his pay checks come from.
-
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/21/cnn-poll-favorable-opinion-of-dick-cheney-on-the-rise/
-
OZ sums up the situation pretty damn well...
-
Cheney, with his epic 13% approval rating, will be speaking on behalf of the Repubs, following Obama speaking on the topic of terror and the wars.
CNN Poll: Favorable opinion of Dick Cheney on the rise
Posted: 12:08 PM ET
From CNN Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser
WASHINGTON (CNN) — The same day Dick Cheney delivered a major speech on the battle against terrorism, a new national poll suggests that favorable opinions of the former vice president are on the rise.
But the CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey, released Wednesday morning, indicates that a majority of Americans still have an unfavorable opinion of Cheney.
Fifty-five percent of people questioned in the poll say they have an unfavorable opinion of the former vice president. Thirty-seven percent say they have a favorable opinion of Cheney, up eight points from January when he left office.
In the past two months the former vice president has become a frequent critic of the new Administration in numerous national media interviews.
“Is Cheney’s uptick due to his visibility as one of the most outspoken critics of the Obama administration? Almost certainly not,” says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “Former President George W. Bush's favorable rating rose six points in that same time period, and Bush has not given a single public speech since he left office.”
The poll suggests that 41 percent of Americans hold a favorable opinion of the former president, with 57 percent viewing him unfavorably.
The survey’s release came just a few hours before Cheney spoke out Thursday on the war against terror during a speech at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington based think tank. The former vice president defended the Bush Administration’s handling of the war on terror and challenged the Obama Administration’s attempt to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.
The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll was conducted May 14-17, with 1,010 adult Americans questioned by telephone. The survey’s sampling error is plus or minus three percentage points.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/21/cnn-poll-favorable-opinion-of-dick-cheney-on-the-rise/#more-52652
-
weird you have detailed responses with cites for anything discussed...
but when you're given a Q like this, you deliver a vague 1000 page document.
The reason for this is that I can't cut and past from the document.
I could give you screen shots or reference pages if you want.
-
In July 1995, Attorney General Reno issued formal procedures aimed at managing information sharing between Justice Department prosecutors and the FBI. They were developed in a working group led by the Justice Department's Executive Office of National Security, overseen by Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick.33 These procedures-while requiring the sharing of intelligence information with prosecutors-regulated the manner in which such information could be shared from the intelligence side of the house to the criminal side.
These procedures were almost immediately misunderstood and misapplied. As a result, there was far less information sharing and coordination between the FBI and the Criminal Division in practice than was allowed under the department's procedures. Over time the procedures came to be referred to as "the wall." The term "the wall" is misleading, however, because several factors led to a series of barriers to information sharing that developed.34
The Office of Intelligence Policy and Review became the sole gatekeeper for passing information to the Criminal Division. Though Attorney General Reno's procedures did not include such a provision, the Office assumed the role anyway, arguing that its position reflected the concerns of Judge Royce Lamberth, then chief judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The Office threatened that if it could not regulate the flow of information to criminal prosecutors, it would no longer present the FBI's warrant requests to the FISA Court. The information flow withered.35
The 1995 procedures dealt only with sharing between agents and criminal prosecutors, not between two kinds of FBI agents, those working on intelligence matters and those working on criminal matters. But pressure from the Office of Intelligence Policy Review, FBI leadership, and the FISA Court built barriers between agents-even agents serving on the same squads. FBI Deputy Director Bryant reinforced the Office's caution by informing agents that too much information sharing could be a career stopper. Agents in the field began to believe-incorrectly-that no FISA information could be shared with agents working on criminal investigations.36
This perception evolved into the still more exaggerated belief that the FBI could not share any intelligence information with criminal investigators, even if no FISA procedures had been used. Thus, relevant information from the National Security Agency and the CIA often failed to make its way to criminal investigators. Separate reviews in 1999, 2000, and 2001 concluded independently that information sharing was not occurring, and that the intent of the 1995 procedures was ignored routinely.37 We will describe some of the unfortunate consequences of these accumulated institutional beliefs and practices in chapter 8.
There were other legal limitations. Both prosecutors and FBI agents argued that they were barred by court rules from sharing grand jury information, even though the prohibition applied only to that small fraction that had been presented to a grand jury, and even that prohibition had exceptions. But as interpreted by FBI field offices, this prohibition could conceivably apply to much of the information unearthed in an investigation. There were also restrictions, arising from executive order, on the commingling of domestic information with foreign intelligence. Finally the NSA began putting caveats on its Bin Ladin-related reports that required prior approval before sharing their contents with criminal investigators and prosecutors. These developments further blocked the arteries of information sharing.38
-
The law requires the NSA to not deliberately collect data on U.S. citizens or on persons in the United States without a warrant based on foreign intelligence requirements. Also, the NSA was supposed to let the FBI know of any indication of crime, espionage, or "terrorist enterprise" so that the FBI could obtain the appropriate warrant. Later in this story, we will learn that while the NSA had the technical capability to report on communications with suspected terrorist facilities in the Middle East, the NSA did not seek FISA Court warrants to collect communications between individuals in the United States and foreign countries, because it believed that this was an FBI role. It also did not want to be viewed as targeting persons in the United States and possibly violating laws that governed NSA's collection of foreign intelligence.68
-
An almost obsessive protection of sources and methods by the NSA, and its focus on foreign intelligence, and its avoidance of anything domestic would, as will be seen, be important elements in the story of 9/11.
-
Cuts in national security expenditures at the end of the Cold War led to budget cuts in the national foreign intelligence program from fiscal years 1990 to 1996 and essentially flat budgets from fiscal years 1996 to 2000 (except for the so-called Gingrich supplemental to the FY1999 budget and two later, smaller supplementals).These cuts compounded the difficulties of the intelligence agencies. Policymakers were asking them to move into the digitized future to fight against computer-to-computer communications and modern communication systems, while maintaining capability against older systems, such as high-frequency radios and ultra-high- and very-high-frequency (line of sight) systems that work like old-style television antennas. Also, demand for imagery increased dramatically following the success of the 1991 Gulf War. Both these developments, in turn, placed a premium on planning the next generation of satellite systems, the cost of which put great pressure on the rest of the intelligence budget. As a result, intelligence agencies experienced staff reductions, affecting both operators and analysts.84
Yet at least for the CIA, part of the burden in tackling terrorism arose from the background we have described: an organization capable of attracting extraordinarily motivated people but institutionally averse to risk, with its capacity for covert action atrophied, predisposed to restrict the distribution of information, having difficulty assimilating new types of personnel, and accustomed to presenting descriptive reportage of the latest intelligence. The CIA, to put it another way, needed significant change in order to get maximum effect in counterterrorism. President Clinton appointed George Tenet as DCI in 1997, and by all accounts terrorism was a priority for him. But Tenet's own assessment, when questioned by the Commission, was that in 2004, the CIA's clandestine service was still at least five years away from being fully ready to play its counterterrorism role.85 And while Tenet was clearly the leader of the CIA, the intelligence community's confederated structure left open the question of who really was in charge of the entire U.S. intelligence effort.
-
The Attorney General told us he asked Pickard whether there was intelligence about attacks in the United States and that Pickard said no. Pickard said he replied that he could not assure Ashcroft that there would be no attacks in the United States, although the reports of threats were related to overseas targets. Ashcroft said he therefore assumed the FBI was doing what it needed to do. He acknowledged that in retrospect, this was a dangerous assumption. He did not ask the FBI what it was doing in response to the threats and did not task it to take any specific action. He also did not direct the INS, then still part of the Department of Justice, to take any specific action.53
In sum, the domestic agencies never mobilized in response to the threat. They did not have direction, and did not have a plan to institute. The borders were not hardened. Transportation systems were not fortified. Electronic surveillance was not targeted against a domestic threat.54 State and local law enforcement were not marshaled to augment the FBI's efforts. The public was not warned.
The terrorists exploited deep institutional failings within our government. The question is whether extra vigilance might have turned up an opportunity to disrupt the plot. As seen in chapter 7, al Qaeda's operatives made mistakes. At least two such mistakes created opportunities during 2001, especially in late August.
-
"Jane," "Dave," and an FBI analyst who was on detail to the CIA's Bin Ladin unit went to New York on June 11 to meet with the agents about the Cole case. "Jane" brought the surveillance pictures. At some point in the meeting she showed the photographs to the agents and asked whether they recognized Quso in any of them. The agents asked questions about the photographs- Why were they taken? Why were these people being followed? Where are the rest of the photographs?70
The only information "Jane" had about the meeting-other than the photographs-were the NSA reports that she had found on Intelink. These reports, however, contained caveats that their contents could not be shared with criminal investigators without the permission of the Justice Department's Office of Intelligence Policy and Review (OIPR).Therefore "Jane" concluded that she could not pass on information from those reports to the agents. This decision was potentially significant, because the signals intelligence she did not share linked Mihdhar to a suspected terrorist facility in the Middle East. The agents would have established a link to the suspected facility from their work on the embassy bombings case. This link would have made them very interested in learning more about Mihdhar.71 The sad irony is that the agents who found the source were being kept from obtaining the fruits of their own work.
"Dave," the CIA analyst, knew more about the Kuala Lumpur meeting. He knew that Mihdhar possessed a U.S. visa, that his visa application indicated that he intended to travel to New York, that Hazmi had traveled to Los Angeles, and that a source had put Mihdhar in the company of Khallad. No one at the meeting asked him what he knew; he did not volunteer anything. He told investigators that as a CIA analyst, he was not authorized to answer FBI questions regarding CIA information. "Jane" said she assumed that if "Dave" knew the answers to questions, he would have volunteered them. The New York agents left the meeting without obtaining information that might have started them looking for Mihdhar.72
Mihdhar had been a weak link in al Qaeda's operational planning. He had left the United States in June 2000, a mistake KSM realized could endanger the entire plan-for to continue with the operation, Mihdhar would have to travel to the United States again. And unlike other operatives, Mihdhar was not "clean": he had jihadist connections. It was just such connections that had brought him to the attention of U.S. officials.
-
One of the Cole case agents read the lead with interest, and contacted "Jane" to obtain more information. "Jane" argued, however, that because the agent was designated a "criminal" FBI agent, not an intelligence FBI agent, the wall kept him from participating in any search for Mihdhar. In fact, she felt he had to destroy his copy of the lead because it contained NSA information from reports that included caveats ordering that the information not be shared without OIPR's permission. The agent asked "Jane" to get an opinion from the FBI's National Security Law Unit (NSLU) on whether he could open a criminal case on Mihdhar.80
"Jane" sent an email to the Cole case agent explaining that according to the NSLU, the case could be opened only as an intelligence matter, and that if Mihdhar was found, only designated intelligence agents could conduct or even be present at any interview. She appears to have misunderstood the complex rules that could apply to this situation.81
The FBI agent angrily responded:
Whatever has happened to this-someday someone will die-and wall or not-the public will not understand why we were not more effective and throwing every resource we had at certain "problems."
Let's hope the National Security Law Unit will stand behind their decisions then, especially since the biggest threat to us now, UBL, is getting the most "protection."
"Jane" replied that she was not making up the rules; she claimed that they were in the relevant manual and "ordered by the [FISA] Court and every office of the FBI is required to follow them including FBI NY."82
-
As Tenet told us, "the system was blinking red" during the summer of 2001. Officials were alerted across the world. Many were doing everything they possibly could to respond to the threats.
Yet no one working on these late leads in the summer of 2001 connected the case in his or her in-box to the threat reports agitating senior officials and being briefed to the President. Thus, these individual cases did not become national priorities. As the CIA supervisor "John" told us, no one looked at the bigger picture; no analytic work foresaw the lightning that could connect the thundercloud to the ground.113
We see little evidence that the progress of the plot was disturbed by any government action. The U.S. government was unable to capitalize on mistakes made by al Qaeda. Time ran out.
-
The high price of keeping counterterrorism policy within the restricted circle of the Counterterrorism Security Group and the highest-level principals was nowhere more apparent than in the military establishment. After the August 1998 missile strike, other members of the JCS let the press know their unhappiness that, in conformity with the Goldwater-Nichols reforms, Shelton had been the only member of the JCS to be consulted. Although follow-on military options were briefed more widely, the vice director of operations on the Joint Staff commented to us that intelligence and planning documents relating to al Qaeda arrived in a ziplock red package and that many flag and general officers never had the clearances to see its contents.33
At no point before 9/11 was the Department of Defense fully engaged in the mission of countering al Qaeda, though this was perhaps the most dangerous foreign enemy then threatening the United States. The Clinton administration effectively relied on the CIA to take the lead in preparing long-term offensive plans against an enemy sanctuary. The Bush administration adopted this approach, although its emerging new strategy envisioned some yet undefined further role for the military in addressing the problem. Within Defense, both Secretary Cohen and Secretary Donald Rumsfeld gave their principal attention to other challenges.
America's homeland defenders faced outward. NORAD itself was barely able to retain any alert bases. Its planning scenarios occasionally considered the danger of hijacked aircraft being guided to American targets, but only aircraft that were coming from overseas. We recognize that a costly change in NORAD's defense posture to deal with the danger of suicide hijackers, before such a threat had ever actually been realized, would have been a tough sell. But NORAD did not canvass available intelligence and try to make the case.
The most serious weaknesses in agency capabilities were in the domestic arena. In chapter 3 we discussed these institutions-the FBI, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the FAA, and others. The major pre-9/11 effort to strengthen domestic agency capabilities came in 2000, as part of a millennium after-action review. President Clinton and his principal advisers paid considerable attention then to border security problems, but were not able to bring about significant improvements before leaving office. The NSC-led interagency process did not effectively bring along the leadership of the Justice and Transportation departments in an agenda for institutional change.
The FBI did not have the capability to link the collective knowledge of agents in the field to national priorities. The acting director of the FBI did not learn of his Bureau's hunt for two possible al Qaeda operatives in the United States or about his Bureau's arrest of an Islamic extremist taking flight training until September 11.The director of central intelligence knew about the FBI's Moussaoui investigation weeks before word of it made its way even to the FBI's own assistant director for counterterrorism.
Other agencies deferred to the FBI. In the August 6 PDB reporting to President Bush of 70 full-field investigations related to al Qaeda, news the President said he found heartening, the CIA had simply restated what the FBI had said. No one looked behind the curtain.
-
Responsibility for domestic intelligence gathering on terrorism was vested solely in the FBI, yet during almost all of the Clinton administration the relationship between the FBI Director and the President was nearly nonexistent. The FBI Director would not communicate directly with the President. His key personnel shared very little information with the National Security Council and the rest of the national security community. As a consequence, one of the critical working relationships in the counterterrorism effort was broken.
-
Barry is chasing the former VP around. he had to reschedual his news conference to get ahead of Cheney's. His speech was more BS and crying about what the previous admin had done,barely anything about what he's gonna do. Well actually we know what he's gonna do, the SAME SHIT AS BUSH. Good job Barry.
-
We all know where his pay checks come from.
Where is that.
I think 240 claimed I worked for the government 2 years ago.
I don't.
I am a Canadian Engineer that works in the private industry.
Barry is chasing the former VP around. he had to reschedual his news conference to get ahead of Cheney's. His speech was more BS and crying about what the previous admin had done,barely anything about what he's gonna do. Well actually we know what he's gonna do, the SAME SHIT AS BUSH. Good job Barry.
He has to. All of the agencies are telling him that Gitmo was the right thing to do.
That he needs wire tapping and that they need enhanced interrogation techniques.
Most of these recommendations came from internal reports after 9-11.
Obama can ignore these reports at his own peril.
-
Which is exactly the reverse of all his campaign bullshit. I know he has to...because its the reality of the situation. Maybe ol george wasn't such an idiot. I can atleast say with supreme confidence he knew who the hell his Sec Def was.
-
Where is that.
I think 240 claimed I worked for the government 2 years ago.
I don't.
Don't play dumb with me joker. We all know you are sock puppet for the US government's counter forum propaganda team (CFPT).
J/k
Joking aside, I appreciate your concise support material, links and such when you make a point.
-
yeah, joker is involved in the BBing scene and works in an industry that requires more brainpower than I could ever muster, i'll give him that.
What, we don't warrant enough views to get our own disinfo guy?
Wait, is that why BB is here? ???
-
Joking aside, I appreciate your concise support material, links and such when you make a point.
Yep.
-
Don't play dumb with me joker. We all know you are sock puppet for the US government's counter forum propaganda team (CFPT).
J/k
Joking aside, I appreciate your concise support material, links and such when you make a point.
HAHA
Thanks,
It takes time to refute some of these outlandish statements.
Especially when the quotes come from crazy racist sources.
Or logic that defies me.
yeah, joker is involved in the BBing scene and works in an industry that requires more brainpower than I could ever muster, i'll give him that.
What, we don't warrant enough views to get our own disinfo guy?
Wait, is that why BB is here? ???
Thanks, though I am not as involved in BB as I once was. Sadly my real job takes up too much time.
240 small business drives the economy and I respect anyone that is willing to hang their own shingle.
-
President Obama told human rights advocates at the White House on Wednesday that he was mulling the need for a "preventive detention" system that would establish a legal basis for the United States to incarcerate terrorism suspects who are deemed a threat to national security but cannot be tried, two participants in the private session said.
***
The two participants, outsiders who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the session was intended to be off the record, said they left the meeting dismayed.
***
"He was almost ruminating over the need for statutory change to the laws so that we can deal with individuals who we can't charge and detain," one participant said. "We've known this is on the horizon for many years, but we were able to hold it off with George Bush. The idea that we might find ourselves fighting with the Obama administration over these powers is really stunning."
The other participant said Mr. Obama did not seem to be thinking about preventive detention for terrorism suspects now held at Guantanamo Bay, but rather for those captured in the future, in settings other than a legitimate battlefield like Afghanistan…
-
Soldier Gets Life Sentence for Iraq Murders
Published: May 21, 2009
A jury in Kentucky sentenced a 24-year-old former soldier to life in prison without parole on Thursday for raping a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and murdering her, her parents and a younger sister in Iraq.
The verdict spared the former soldier, Steven D. Green, capital punishment for a crime that spurred demands for retribution from Iraqis and raised questions about Army oversight of its most combat-stressed forces.
After deliberating for just one day, the 12-member jury sitting in Paducah, Ky., declared itself hung late Thursday afternoon, resulting in the lesser sentence, said Dawn Masden, a spokeswoman for the United States attorney for the Western District of Kentucky, based in Louisville.
The verdict seemed likely to anger Iraqis who had argued that Mr. Green and the other soldiers involved in the murders should have been tried by an Iraqi court and who had asserted that only a death penalty could satisfy the family and fellow villagers of the victims.
At least four other soldiers have pleaded guilty or were convicted in military courts for their roles in the rape and murders. While most of them received long prison terms, none are facing the death penalty, and all will be eligible for parole in 10 years or less.
Mr. Green’s trial was the first capital punishment case tried under a 2000 law allowing federal criminal courts to try crimes committed overseas by former members of the military, military dependents, contractors and other civilians, legal experts said. Mr. Green left the Army, with an honorable discharge on a diagnosis for a personality disorder, just weeks before he was arrested in 2006.
The March 2006 murders in Mahmudiya, a Sunni-dominated town 20 miles south of Baghdad, were so bloody that American and Iraqi authorities initially thought they were the work of insurgents. The American soldiers were implicated after at least one of them acknowledged to fellow soldiers a role in the crimes.
At the time, the Iraq insurgency was near its violent apex, and American forces were suffering heavy casualties. Private Green’s unit, Bravo Company, 1st Battalion, 502nd Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team of the 101st Airborne Division, was sent to a particularly violent area known by soldiers as the Triangle of Death south of Baghdad, soon after arriving in Iraq in the fall of 2005.
The battalion quickly took casualties, including a sergeant close to Private Green. In December, Private Green, along with other members of his platoon, told an Army stress counselor that he wanted to take revenge on Iraqis, including civilians. The counselor labeled the unit “mission incapable” because of poor morale, high combat stress and anger over the deaths, and said it needed both stronger supervision and rest. It got neither, testimony at Mr. Green’s trial showed.
On March 11, 2006, after drinking Iraqi whiskey, Private Green and other soldiers manning a checkpoint decided to rape an Iraqi girl who lived nearby, according to testimony. Wearing civilian clothing, the soldiers broke into a house and raped Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi. Soldiers in the group testified that Private Green killed the girl’s parents and a younger sister before raping and then shooting the girl in the head with the family’s own AK-47, which it kept for self defense.
At his trial, Mr. Green’s lawyers built a case intended less to deny his role in the crime than to plant questions about whether he deserved the death penalty.
Mr. Green, who was reared in Midland, Tex., came from a broken and chaotic home, defense witnesses testified, and despite scoring well on intelligence tests, was highly impulsive and did poorly in school. He got into the Army in 2005 on a so-called morals waiver, having had problems with alcohol and drug abuse.
On May 7, the same jury that issued the life sentence convicted Mr. Green on 17 counts, including premeditated murder.
During the sentencing phase of the trial, the Army stress counselor, Lt. Col. Karen Marrs, a mental health nurse practitioner, testified that then-Private Green was disturbed by deaths in his unit and had expressed a desire to hurt Iraqi civilians. But she also said that such sentiments had been expressed by other members of the unit and are not uncommon among troops in combat. On questioning from the prosecution, she also said that she thought Private Green clearly understood that hurting civilians would be wrong and that he had no plans to act on his anger.
The defense argued that the Army should have provided stronger leadership to Private Green’s unit, and should have removed Private Green from front-line duty for more intensive mental health care.
But the prosecution strenuously rejected that argument, saying that many combat troops face the same kinds of trauma and stress as Private Green and his platoon, but that few commit atrocities.
“The defendant failed to live up to his duty to protect the innocent people of Iraq,” Marissa Ford, one of the federal prosecutors, said near the beginning of the penalty phase.
Doug Green, 28, Mr. Green’s brother, told the Associated Press: “I do think it gives him a chance to have some semblance of a life. We’re grateful for that.”
-
HAHA
Thanks,
It takes time to refute some of these outlandish statements.
Especially when the quotes come from crazy racist sources.
Or logic that defies me.
Thanks, though I am not as involved in BB as I once was. Sadly my real job takes up too much time.
240 small business drives the economy and I respect anyone that is willing to hang their own shingle.
What was your "fake" job and how do you determine if it is fake or real?
-
What was your "fake" job and how do you determine if it is fake or real?
::)
-
The differance will be Chenney kept Americans safe for the last 7.5 years while Obama has to rely on his community organising to come up with a policy.This is a battle of an incredible lightweight in Obama vs. a guy that knows more then Obama will ever know.
meanwhile more illegals came into the nation...attack by hostiles or a furture hostile break up the United State...which one do you want?
-
Soldier Gets Life Sentence for Iraq Murders
Published: May 21, 2009
A jury in Kentucky sentenced a 24-year-old former soldier to life in prison without parole on Thursday for raping a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and murdering her, her parents and a younger sister in Iraq.
The verdict spared the former soldier, Steven D. Green, capital punishment for a crime that spurred demands for retribution from Iraqis and raised questions about Army oversight of its most combat-stressed forces.
After deliberating for just one day, the 12-member jury sitting in Paducah, Ky., declared itself hung late Thursday afternoon, resulting in the lesser sentence, said Dawn Masden, a spokeswoman for the United States attorney for the Western District of Kentucky, based in Louisville.
The verdict seemed likely to anger Iraqis who had argued that Mr. Green and the other soldiers involved in the murders should have been tried by an Iraqi court and who had asserted that only a death penalty could satisfy the family and fellow villagers of the victims.
At least four other soldiers have pleaded guilty or were convicted in military courts for their roles in the rape and murders. While most of them received long prison terms, none are facing the death penalty, and all will be eligible for parole in 10 years or less.
Mr. Green’s trial was the first capital punishment case tried under a 2000 law allowing federal criminal courts to try crimes committed overseas by former members of the military, military dependents, contractors and other civilians, legal experts said. Mr. Green left the Army, with an honorable discharge on a diagnosis for a personality disorder, just weeks before he was arrested in 2006.
The March 2006 murders in Mahmudiya, a Sunni-dominated town 20 miles south of Baghdad, were so bloody that American and Iraqi authorities initially thought they were the work of insurgents. The American soldiers were implicated after at least one of them acknowledged to fellow soldiers a role in the crimes.
At the time, the Iraq insurgency was near its violent apex, and American forces were suffering heavy casualties. Private Green’s unit, Bravo Company, 1st Battalion, 502nd Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team of the 101st Airborne Division, was sent to a particularly violent area known by soldiers as the Triangle of Death south of Baghdad, soon after arriving in Iraq in the fall of 2005.
The battalion quickly took casualties, including a sergeant close to Private Green. In December, Private Green, along with other members of his platoon, told an Army stress counselor that he wanted to take revenge on Iraqis, including civilians. The counselor labeled the unit “mission incapable” because of poor morale, high combat stress and anger over the deaths, and said it needed both stronger supervision and rest. It got neither, testimony at Mr. Green’s trial showed.
On March 11, 2006, after drinking Iraqi whiskey, Private Green and other soldiers manning a checkpoint decided to rape an Iraqi girl who lived nearby, according to testimony. Wearing civilian clothing, the soldiers broke into a house and raped Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi. Soldiers in the group testified that Private Green killed the girl’s parents and a younger sister before raping and then shooting the girl in the head with the family’s own AK-47, which it kept for self defense.
At his trial, Mr. Green’s lawyers built a case intended less to deny his role in the crime than to plant questions about whether he deserved the death penalty.
Mr. Green, who was reared in Midland, Tex., came from a broken and chaotic home, defense witnesses testified, and despite scoring well on intelligence tests, was highly impulsive and did poorly in school. He got into the Army in 2005 on a so-called morals waiver, having had problems with alcohol and drug abuse.
On May 7, the same jury that issued the life sentence convicted Mr. Green on 17 counts, including premeditated murder.
During the sentencing phase of the trial, the Army stress counselor, Lt. Col. Karen Marrs, a mental health nurse practitioner, testified that then-Private Green was disturbed by deaths in his unit and had expressed a desire to hurt Iraqi civilians. But she also said that such sentiments had been expressed by other members of the unit and are not uncommon among troops in combat. On questioning from the prosecution, she also said that she thought Private Green clearly understood that hurting civilians would be wrong and that he had no plans to act on his anger.
The defense argued that the Army should have provided stronger leadership to Private Green’s unit, and should have removed Private Green from front-line duty for more intensive mental health care.
But the prosecution strenuously rejected that argument, saying that many combat troops face the same kinds of trauma and stress as Private Green and his platoon, but that few commit atrocities.
“The defendant failed to live up to his duty to protect the innocent people of Iraq,” Marissa Ford, one of the federal prosecutors, said near the beginning of the penalty phase.
Doug Green, 28, Mr. Green’s brother, told the Associated Press: “I do think it gives him a chance to have some semblance of a life. We’re grateful for that.”
And ur point is..douchebag.
-
Anyone watch the two speeches?Chenney took Obamas pants off and spanked his fucking ass.Not even the democrats are on Board with this community organisers plan.
-
Anyone watch the two speeches?Chenney took Obamas pants off and spanked his fucking ass.Not even the democrats are on Board with this community organisers plan.
yeah, the way he used '911' 25 times was splendid.
it's like talking to a 6 year old about eating his vegetables, and reminding him that grandpa died of colon cancer 25 times.
Of course we need to torture these fckwits - obama has left those tools on the table in case you didn't notice. The problem is, do we leave them on the vacation spot konwn as gitmo, or open a Gitmo2 in the states, supermax prison, and give them all life sentences.
I say yes. Cheney released 2/3 of those fvcks. He says no. And he wants them to stay at the republican-described "vacation resort". I think despite the tough talk, he's a little soft on doling out punishment to these bad guys...
-
yeah, the way he used '911' 25 times was splendid.
it's like talking to a 6 year old about eating his vegetables, and reminding him that grandpa died of colon cancer 25 times.
Of course we need to torture these fckwits - obama has left those tools on the table in case you didn't notice. The problem is, do we leave them on the vacation spot konwn as gitmo, or open a Gitmo2 in the states, supermax prison, and give them all life sentences.
I say yes. Cheney released 2/3 of those fvcks. He says no. And he wants them to stay at the republican-described "vacation resort". I think despite the tough talk, he's a little soft on doling out punishment to these bad guys...
YEAH THE WAY OBAMA BLAMED THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION 28 TIMES!!!Obama just saw yesterday Terrorists planning to attack us that were CONVERTED IN JAIL!!!This a-hole wants to put the muslim terrorists in jail so they can convert the prison.That community organiser is a freaking brilliant guy.He learned well at the feet of Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright.
Chenney kicked his black ass and made him look like the know nothing community organiser he is.He should stick to working with ACORN to steal elections!!
-
Chenney kicked his black ass
Billy, what does race have to do with anything here?
-
yeah, the way he used '911' 25 times was splendid.
it's like talking to a 6 year old about eating his vegetables, and reminding him that grandpa died of colon cancer 25 times.
Of course we need to torture these fckwits - obama has left those tools on the table in case you didn't notice. The problem is, do we leave them on the vacation spot konwn as gitmo, or open a Gitmo2 in the states, supermax prison, and give them all life sentences.
I say yes. Cheney released 2/3 of those fvcks. He says no. And he wants them to stay at the republican-described "vacation resort". I think despite the tough talk, he's a little soft on doling out punishment to these bad guys...
Barry blames everything on Bush..he whines like a bitch about everything. He whined during the Latin American summit about not being blamed for the Bay of Pigs. What Barry forgets is that he is the fucking PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES and not still running for president. He is now responsible for everything. He is a weak weak man. Cheney is running this debate and Obama is playing catch-up.
-
Barry blames everything on Bush..he whines like a bitch about everything.
And you blame everything on Obama. Whining like a bitch yourself. So really, what point were you illustrating here? Besides typical excuse making and bullshit?
-
Again..ur an idiot. What did Barry say in his speech? What new policy did he set? What new plan did he put forward................. ..ZERO. Ur lib douchebags had 8 years to blast Bush. Well guess what Barry is in charge, its either his fault or its not. He owns it all now. U idiots voted for him, u can live with it when he makes an ass of himself.
-
Are we going to spend the next 8 years watching you attempt to call your BOSS "Barry". It's kind of sad really. Like you have a close relationship with him or something. Or is this your way of attempting to soothe your own frustrations.
Well get this... "BARRY" ain't got no time for playa hatas.
-
Are we going to spend the next 8 years watching you attempt to call your BOSS "Barry". It's kind of sad really. Like you have a close relationship with him or something. Or is this your way of attempting to soothe your own frustrations.
Well get this... "BARRY" ain't got no time for playa hatas.
Our BOSS?That blue mouthed idiot isnt my boss.He hasnt given me a fucking dime!!!!My boss is the guy that signs my check.Politicians are NOT the boss,WE are their boss,we can fire them whenever we want.
-
Billy, what does race have to do with anything here?
I dont know,why dont you get upset when people like YOU call Rush fat or Chenney fat.What does weight have to do with it?
-
I dont know,why dont you get upset when people like YOU call Rush fat or Chenney fat.What does weight have to do with it?
I guess if we were all crying about how only fat people voted for fat people, or fat people were making policies to benefit fat people, etc.. then you would have a point.
But you don't.
-
I dont know,why dont you get upset when people like YOU call Rush fat or Chenney fat.What does weight have to do with it?
Obesity is a billion dollar strain on our Health System, Economy as well as contributing to higher Energy usage and costs.
;)
-
Obesity is a billion dollar strain on our Health System, Economy as well as contributing to higher Energy usage and costs.
;)
You should put us obese people in concentration camps.
-
Our BOSS?That blue mouthed idiot isnt my boss.He hasnt given me a fucking dime!!!!My boss is the guy that signs my check.Politicians are NOT the boss,WE are their boss,we can fire them whenever we want.
Newsflash :
I quoted and directed my reply to the post of HH6. Not you. HH6 is military. Obama is POTUS which makes him Commander. Which - in short words - is "boss" of HH6. Free lesson for today.
If you don't like your politicians, why aren't you just firing them then? Hmmmm?
-
Newsflash :
I quoted and directed my reply to the post of HH6. Not you. HH6 is military. Obama is POTUS which makes him Commander. Which - in short words - is "boss" of HH6. Free lesson for today.
If you don't like your politicians, why aren't you just firing them then? Hmmmm?
They are fired by voting against them.Just like Chris Dodd will soon be fired.Just like Harry Reid will soon be fired.
-
They are fired by voting against them.Just like Chris Dodd will soon be fired.Just like Harry Reid will soon be fired.
And look how many voted for them the last two elections. I would say they have pretty good job security at this point.
-
And look how many voted for them the last two elections. I would say they have pretty good job security at this point.
Care to wager on Dodd winning next election?