Posted on 11/14/2004 5:56:00 PM PST by hope
Reprinted from NewsMax.com
CIA Agent: Nuke Attack Surely Coming
Dave Eberhart, NewsMax.comFormer CIA agent Michael Scheuer told CBS “Sixty Minutes”’ Steve Kroft Sunday that the U.S. fumbled ten chances to kill or capture terror chief Osama bin Laden – before 9/11. Now, he is convinced that the international outlaw will attack the U.S. homeland with some sort of nuclear weapon of mass destruction.
Monday, Nov. 15, 2004
"They're intention is to end the war as soon as they can and to ratchet up the pain for the Americans until we get out of their region.... If they acquire the weapon, they will use it, whether it's chemical, biological or some sort of nuclear weapon," said Scheuer.
In his first television interview without disguise, Scheuer appeared most aggravated by a missed opportunity to level a hunting camp where bin Laden was holding court with several Arab princes.
“If they were eating goat with bin Laden, you know they were up to nefarious purposes. What were a few less Arab princes when considering 3000 dead Americans?”
At one point, the gung-ho agent was dismissed from the bin Laden project at the CIA that went by the code name “Alec.” He told Kroft that he was considered “too persistent” and constantly lobbied his superiors about their “unwillingness to take risks.”
But after 9/11 he was brought back aboard.
His attitude about U.S. policy has not gotten much better. He holds former CIA director George Tenet responsible for 9/11 and lambastes former White House security aide Richard Clark for “constantly denigrating our intelligence.”
"One of the questions that should have been asked of Mr. Tenet was why were there always enough people for the public relations office, for the academic outreach office, for the diversity and multi-cultural office? All those things are admirable and necessary but none of them are protecting the American people from a foreign threat," said Scheuer.
Scheuer thinks it is a grave mistake for the administration to advertise bin Laden as a “thug or gangster.”
“He is not irrational but a worthy opponent,” Scheuer insisted, going as far as to say that bin Laden was in his opinion “a great man.”
“His greatness comes from his ability to influence the course of history.”
"Until we respect him, sir, we are going to die in numbers that are probably unnecessary, yes. He's a very, very talented man and a very worthy opponent," he added to Kroft.
Scheuer coyly admitted to CBS that he was the "anonymous" author of two books critical of the West's response to bin Laden and al Qaeda, the most recent of which is titled Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror.
The CIA allowed him to write the books provided he remain anonymous, but now is allowing him to reveal himself for the first time on Sunday's broadcast; he formally leaves the Agency on Nov. 12.
Other points from the interview:
The retired CIA man admitted that he was not invited to cabinet meetings during the Richard Clark period at the Clinton White House.
George Tenet and Richard Clark were invited to appear on the program but declined to do so.
Editor's note:
Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
106-106-106
May that was his plan:
At one point, the gung-ho agent was dismissed from the bin Laden project at the CIA that went by the code name “Alec.” He told Kroft that he was considered “too persistent” and constantly lobbied his superiors about their “unwillingness to take risks.”
Correct. But Scheuer's definition of "great" doesn't mean good. It means "changed history".
Really, really bad logic.
Osama could have waited to strike again in the U.S. until he had a nuclear device from Kadhafi or Saddam or an Iranian Ayatollah. He didn't, he struck the Trade Towers to scratch us into world-wide war with Mulims. A Zawahiri approach would be to wait until he has the best weapon of mass murder he can get his hands on, then use it in the U.S. or in a war theater against our forces, to achieve maximum damage.
Osama misunderstood Americans and their tolerance of the degenerate clinton, and the appeasement mentality of the clinton fools and jesters doing everything they could to cover up that we were at war with Terrorism. Had Osama believed Bush would react differently than the sinkEmperor, he would have followed a Zawahiri approach, to be strongest when striking the first major blow. The Trade Towers were but one in a series of scratches at America, in order to escalate gradually into a world-wide jihad against America and everything American. That was Osama's goal. Zawahiri will gladly take down the world to get us out of power.
Bush should spell out to the Arab world just what the consequences would be if this were to happen & by all means carry out the threat.
UR# 84......agreed!
"...They're intention is to end the war as soon as they can and to ratchet up the pain for the Americans until we get out of their region..."
His mantra is the "our foreign policies, not us do they hate" line. Problem is, it's both, as clearly stated by binLaden.
BTW, his book is coy. He suggests some ambits of Osama's theory as something he knows as an expert, however I knew them as verbatim from Osama's speeches - which, by the way, are rarely perused because such makes it hard to maintain the "it's all our fault or Israel's fault" line.
It was. On one level he takes the lefty's usual view that Osama's hate is not about "us" but merely our foreign policy in the Middle east (leaving out Timor, Kashmir, Phillipines, etc.) Ie, ideology has nothing to do with Osama's views.
Then he starts tacitly acknowledging Wahhabist views of permanent jihad and such. He's hard to follow. But he gains credibility since the Bush admin does little to inform discussion.
There is no evidence of this..I don't go on "feelings"..We have had fugitives hide from manhunts here for years..He is among friends ..probably in Pakistan.
Bush needs to become more aggressive here too. Maybe only now he is waking up discovering the mess the CIA is in.
We are being aggressive. Extremely aggressive. The notion that we are not being "aggressive enough" is simply silly.
We have fought the most successful unconventional war in history (to date). We are winning this WOT - Those like this fool who wrote Imperial Hubris are simply mad because they are on the wrong side of history and have been wrong for years in how to successfully not only win a war against terrorist but also in how the Middle East needs to be changed.
Freedom and self-worth are the keys to changing the Middle East. These values have for far to long been denied the citizens of this region.
Does the fact that the terrorists fight within the citizenry make this war extremely difficult and frustrating at times? - Of course it does.
But our goal and our security is worth the risk and costs that are coming in this war.
GWB has been clear from the start - this is a different kind of war - this war will be long - many of our successes will never be known (at least not for years) - But understand we are having silent, untold successes nightly!
For the record:
I would gladly give up my vote, provided
every other woman had to give up hers.
Left to me, I'd restrict the vote to
gun toting, male property owners.
There is no evidence of this..I don't go on "feelings"..We have had fugitives hide from manhunts here for years..He is among friends ..probably in Pakistan..........or CANADA.
/sarcasm
To the contrary, that is precisely what bin Laden is hoping for, that we would blindly strike out at population centers with nukes. He's losing the war and he knows it. He needs to rally Arab outrage back to his side.
--Boot Hill
well then, what would the reprisal be for NYC being nuked?
The junior squad thinks in terms of "reprisals". The varsity squad thinks in terms of global strategy.
--Boot Hill
it might be a little late for the global strategy at that point, our economy would be spiraling towards depression.
The reason that I think OBL's attack on the US was not stupid is because he has achieved the precise goal he set out to acheive...he wants to be the leader of a united Islam, and creating a common foe for all Islam to fear is the fastest way to bring all sects together.
He is not concerned with the survival of Islamic nation states. He wants to be the leader of a Pan-Islamic nation.
We must realize that when the moderates begin to assert control (assuming they ever do), we will again be attacked in an effort to rally all elements under the OBL banner.
Is he intelligent? That depends on whether his methods effectively achieve his ends.
We are being aggressive. Extremely aggressive. The notion that we are not being "aggressive enough" is simply silly
I agree that we are being extremely aggressive on thw e WOT, but until we seal our borders, we will not be as aggressive as we SHOULD be. We are spending billions checking little old ladies shoes at the airport and a few million trying to prevent terrorists from coming across our borders. We will regret this in the future.
I agree with you and also this is just another hit job by CBS on President Bush. They mean to scare the hell out of everyone and make his life miserable if they can. I have no doubt that liberals who watched this show are sh**ing their pants and running in circles tonight, remember the old saying, "when in danger, when in doubt run in circles scream and shout!" This is what the Dems have been doing since Bush won re-election and will continue to do until we finally smear all the terrorists all over africa and asisa.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.