CIA Analyst: 'Whole Bureaucracy' Still Opposes Bush

NewsMax.com ^ | 3/28/04 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[kattracks]

Critics from inside the intelligence community tell Newsweek that post-9/11, despite the Bush administration's establishment of the Terrorist Threat Integration Center (TTIC) to remedy U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies' failure to communicate, everything the various intelligence agencies learn is still not being shared.

"The whole bureaucracy is against TTIC," says one CIA analyst. "They've got the long knives out for it."

Launched last May, the TTIC is an independent body manned with analysts from more than a dozen agencies, including the CIA, FBI, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, the National Security Agency, the Coast Guard, Homeland Security and the Secret Service, reports senior editor Michael Hirsh and investigative correspondent Mark Hosenball in the April 5 issue of Newsweek (on newsstands Monday, March 29).

Each day TTIC analysts are supposed to share whatever they hear about potential threats and produce reports that go to the White House, Pentagon and other major "customers."

But the CIA's Operations Division, otherwise known as the "Clandestine Service," is said to be reluctant to surrender its most tightly held information, principally for fear of compromising the identity of its sources.

There is also a degree of bureaucratic jealousy of the CIA's Directorate of Intelligence. "When 'customers' are being briefed by CIA in the morning, the briefer will give them the TTIC stuff," says the CIA analyst.

"Then he'll say, 'But here's better stuff from our counterterrorism center'." Some CIA officials are also resisting a transfer of the agency's top-secret bin Laden unit to TTIC.

TTIC is run by John Brennan, a senior CIA official who tries to pull together threat intel from all U.S. agencies at a secure vault at Langley (in May, TTIC will move to its own building at an undisclosed location in the Washington area).

Brennan acknowledges that TTIC is having teething problems, but tells Newsweek that he has been given "unparalleled access" to 14 networks of classified information as well as sensitive databases. "There has never been a case when I need information that we haven't been able to get it," he says.

[AmericanVictory]

It is Parkinson's Law; bureaucracy is the Democrat Party. The Democrat Party is bureaucracy and centralized command and control. They are still voting for FDR. Time does not matter.

[Fledermaus]

Kill them all.

I'm sick of entrenched bureaucrats thinking they rule the world.

I say fire every single one of them and start over.

[JasonC]

Misleading headline. They article does not describe opposition to Bush, but opposition to a new office as a clearing house between existing bureaucratic fiefdoms. Not a responsible spin on that.

[GeronL]

Too many of them anyway.

They support those who support useless bureaucracy. Government employee's and welfare recipients should not vote. That would change a lot.

[Fledermaus]

Agreed. Government employees should be forced to make a choice: voting or unions.

Not both. You want a union? You can't vote. Want to vote, you can't be a union member.

Violation of their rights? Nope. It's a choice they make.

But seriously, if I was suddenly chief executive, I'd fire every single government employee. Then I'd have a job fair. If they can show they should be in their job then they'll have to re-apply. Those getting their jobs back because they are actually good workers will get back their status and benefits.

I'd bet good money 20-25% of the employees would never even try because I think they are ghost employees and don't exist. I'd force every department head to account for every single dime spent or be prosecuted for fraud. And I mean EVERY SINGLE DIME!

They don't like it? Tough. Go find a job in the private sector. As Dan Ackroyd'd character in "Ghostbusters" says, "I've worked in the private sector before, they expect results".

Re-invent government? Hell no, I'll nuke it and start over with a command structure similar to the military. Full chain of command and consequences for the actions of the employees. Screw the unions.

But I'm insane. In my world they'll all be wearing Star Trek uniforms of red, blue and gold based on their jobs and I'd sit in a chair on the bridge! he he

[GeronL]

at least then government would be small and efficient and go far far away =o)

[backhoe]

Remember this?

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1106850/posts
CLINTON UNDEAD HAUNTING PENTAGON (More of the Clinton Legacy)
Insight Magazine ^ | June 10, 2002 | J. Michael Waller

[alloysteel]

The situation is both far more grave, and far more interesting, than simply firing the bureaucrats.

On an unrelated subject, the name "John O'Neill" came up, and I did a Google search, stumbling into a tale, or two versions of a tale, I was previously unacquainted with. It seems that there was an FBI agent O'Neill, who was part of the Counterterrorism Unit, a real hands-on sort of guy who got right into the field. O'Neill had identified al-Qaeda as the network, and Osama bin Laden as the hand at its helm, quite early in the game (shortly after the bombings of the embassies in Africa, 1995), and in a single-minded pursuit of this line of inquiry, had identified many of the working connections. He was given little encouragement by the higher-ups in the Department of Justice in the beginning, which included some active suppression from even higher on the chain. His line of inquiry really became divergent after the USS Cole incident in 2000, when he went to Yemen to pursue some leads. The US Ambassador to Yemen, Barbara Bodine, an appointee of the regime of the "Former Occupant of the Oval Office, 1993-2001", took offense at his pursuit of the investigation in that country, and had him barred from returning after he had uncovered some serious leads. This difficulty, plus some snowballing friction that was building up afterwards, resulted in O'Neill finally resigning from the FBI, and taking a new job as director of security for the World Trade Center, where he started on September 10, 2001. He lasted on the job for a day.

For one version of this story, go to the following link:

http://www.govexec.com/features/0503/HSs4.htm

For a second, and much darker interpretation, using all the same factual material, here is a second link:

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/KUP206A.html

The second version implies that there was an extensive degree of collusion between the Saudi royal family, George H.W. Bush, the regime of the "Former Occupant of the Oval Office, 1993-2001", and George W. Bush, all covertly supporting the agenda of al-Qaeda. And to many people, this may seem entirely plausible, regardless of the total impossibility of stretching some of the facts to fit.

Oh, yeah, Richard Clarke's name pops up, too. Although he was much less in the loop than he has implied.

[dyed_in_the_wool]

There is also a degree of bureaucratic jealousy of the CIA's Directorate of Intelligence. "When 'customers' are being briefed by CIA in the morning, the briefer will give them the TTIC stuff," says the CIA analyst.

"Then he'll say, 'But here's better stuff from our counterterrorism center'." Some CIA officials are also resisting a transfer of the agency's top-secret bin Laden unit to TTIC.

I would fire anyone who did this. If it's supposed to be in the first report, then that's where it should be.

[CasearianDaoist]

This is so true. To list 0f flaws - centralized command and control y- ou forgot to add elitism, and in this case ivy league elitism. They have special contept for someone like Bush who comes from their background but is not an elitist.

[rrrod]

quick note to dubya: please remove all clintonistas asap!

[gaspar]

Please note that the report is taken from Newsweek, an arm of the Democrat Party.

[expatpat]

Fire them for insubordination and obstruction if they don't obey.

[Matchett-PI]

It is as Oliver North said on Fox & Friends (Friday 3-26-04): "Most employees in the permanent government bureaucracy are Democrats."

They are entrenched and union-protected.

A perfect hiding place for any of our "enemies within".

In light of that reality, I view having union-protected government employees that can't easily be fired as being an untenable situation for the future. Since the DemocRAT Party represents them and protects them, for the sake of our own safety, we need to pull out all the stops to keep that party OUT of power.