CIA Officials Reveal What Went Wrong – Clinton to Blame

Newsmax ^ | September 12, 2001 | Ruddy

[mgist]

The worst, single most tragic day in the history of America has just passed. Tuesday more Americans likely died than all the casualties of the Battle of Antietam on Wednesday, Sept. 17, 1862.

Already the media spin on yesterday's events is relentless. The talking heads are pushing several themes, including:

Now is not the time to point fingers at responsible parties in America, i.e., political figures like Clinton or our own security agencies.

The events of Tuesday are the "worst-case scenario" – the worst is over.

Osama bin Laden is the culprit. On these points of spin, the first one is baloney. Of course we need to find why our security failed. This is basic.

And unless the big media are consulting a psychic better than the one I use, no one knows what the future days, weeks and months may yield.

This is not the worst-case scenario. A worst-case scenario is a 25-megaton nuclear bomb detonated in New York or a full-scale attack against the U.S.! These should not be ruled out.

These dangers can be avoided, we pray, but only if we stop listening to the media idiots that feed us a diet of blow-dried nonsense. Is Katie Couric going to say how bad she feels for the terrorists who were driven to these cowardly acts?

It is the big media and the hack politicians that led us to this nightmarish day.

Smart to Examine Who Failed Us We are Americans, so let's get our feet back on the ground and use common sense.

The media say we shouldn't point fingers. (Funny, isn't it, how the media have spent 30 years pointing fingers at Richard Nixon for his alleged crimes, but when one of their liberal favorites is due for some blame, they feed us the mantras like "Let's move on!" and "No time to point fingers!")

Common sense, in fact, dictates that we need to critically examine the people who are to blame for this incident, both the perpetrators (and if you believe Osama bin Laden was the major mastermind behind this, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you) and the people we pay to protect us – that is, our national security agencies.

Without question, these agencies failed miserably in preventing this sophisticated, wide-scale and coordinated attack against America.

Intelligence Agencies Failed Miserably

Tuesday I received an e-mail from a recently retired high-ranking CIA official. I will identify him as "Harry":

Here's what Harry said:

"... Reacting effectively and justly to this [attack] makes us hugely dependent on intell [intelligence] capabilities that failed us miserably. This is an enormous liability, which we shall not be able to fix before we have to react. Payback time for the last eight years!"

He continued: "There were clearly enormous failures here. This operation was ingenious in its simplicity, which would have limited the size (number of people, actions) of the operation and hence detectability. But it could not have been that small for at least a dozen men to hijack four carefully chosen aircraft (routes, fuel load) with carefully coordinated timing. And to get through security with knives big enough to subdue four relatively large crews. If the intell and security systems claim that this challenge is simply too hard for them, they have to be replaced, root and branch. Because this challenge is the challenge. It is now pretty self-evident that claims of reform and adjustment [at the intelligence agencies] to new realities that we've heard over the past eight years or so are hollow."

Of course, it's obvious why the media doesn't want any finger pointing.

Guess who ran the U.S. government and was responsible for our national security for the past eight years?

Yes, you got it, Bill Clinton, Hillary's husband.

Clinton Responsible for Unpreparedness

The Clintons were supported vociferously by the media through the worst imaginable scandals.

During that time I was one of the lead reporters opposing the Clintons. I was mocked and vilified by my colleagues for doing so.

I said throughout that period that Bill Clinton's personal corruption was wholesale and mirrored how he was corrupting America's national security.

I wrote articles and said repeatedly that America, sadly, may end up paying a heavy price for Bill Clinton and the major media's complicity.

I don't believe the worst has passed with the incidents of today.

We remain vulnerable and weak.

Brutally, we witnessed our weakness today.

During eight years, Clinton decimated America's military. Our forces were cut almost in half under his stewardship.

Research and development on all new weapons systems were brought almost to a halt as other nations continued to build. Clinton destroyed nearly our entire arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons. Monsters like Saddam flourished as Clinton bombed aspirin factories, tent cities in Afghanistan and worthless radar stations in the Iraqi desert.

These are open facts, easily verifiable. Clinton, the Ever-Clever Bastard

But Clinton, the ever-clever bastard, was more insidious. Little, systematic changes were undertaken to destroy America's intelligence agencies.

Let me explain. A regular NewsMax reader, "Roger," was a CIA spy in the Mideast.

I met him almost two years ago. Roger wanted to tell me why a gung-ho American quit the CIA in disgust.

Roger said the CIA was not interested in recruiting spies.

Clinton and company knew they could not just tell the CIA to stop recruiting spies. That would look stupid and embarrassing.

So they just changed the rules of how spies are recruited, raising the bar on requirements to such a high degree that the most valuable spies could never meet CIA standards and couldn't work for us.

Previously, I wrote how Clinton effectively stopped the recruitment of Chinese nationals by demanding that only high-ranking embassy officials could be recruited – knowing this is almost impossible. Roger told me that. Roger reminded me again of this today.

He noted that Clinton policies reached their zenith under CIA Director John Deutch and his top assistant, Nora Slatkin. The pair ran Clinton's CIA in the mid-1990s and implemented a "human rights scrub" policy.

Here's how Roger described it in an e-mail Tuesday evening: "Deutch and Nora, Clinton's anti-intelligence plants, implemented a universal 'human rights scrub' of all assets, virtually shutting down operations for 6 months to a year. This was after something happened in Central America (there was an American woman involved who was the common law wife of a commie who went missing there) that got a lot of bad press for the agency.

"After that, each asset had to be certified as being 'clean for human rights violations.'

"What this did was to put off limits, in effect, terrorists, criminals, and anyone else who would have info on these kinds of people."

Roger says the CIA, even under new leadership, has never recovered from the "Human Rights Scrub" policy.

Perhaps that was the intention.

But we, the American people, Congress, and honest media need to examine all of these issues, now and quickly. If we don't, we risk even more grave dangers than those that we just lived through.

[Ann Archy]

Tom Clancy NAILED Judy Woodruff and CNN yesterday!! It was the ONLY bright spot of the day!! Se saithey didn't get involved with how the govt. spent their money...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA>>>>WHAT A LIAR!! He said it all about the LIBERAL media....and he will NOT be invited back on.

[Ann Archy]

Where's Frank Church? And where are the stories about his role??

Thank God for Tom Clancy's words!!!

Andrea Mitchell should have been FIRED yesterday!!

[DonQ]

I believe the first World Trade Center bombing took place in February 1993 because of the very cozy relationship between the Arab extremists and the Reagan-Bush Administration, which commenced long before the Iran-Contra events and persisted well past Bitburg (which was part of an agreed-upon demonstration of independence from Jewish interests). Clinton wasn't a part of that arrangement and it was hoped that by demonstrating Arab abilities to hurt the US then Clinton could be made compliant.

[spooner]

Dream on.

[boltfromblue]

What many were told by a speaker at a conference last weekend was that 130 Iraqi women were known to be set to smuggle into this country vials of anthrax in their vaginas to disseminate within 100 U.S. cities. I understand colloidal silver can counter it.

[riri]

I have read something about antibiotics from a feed store, also. Don´t you have to actually come into contact with the spores to become infected? Does anyone on this board have anymore knowledge on this subject? I am more concerned about something like small pox, or some hybrid mix of some terrible diseases.

It has me very worried to be honest with you.

[boltfromblue]

I am sorry if I alarmed you or anyone else, of course. Yes, you would have to be in contact with the spores to breathe them in. The source of this spoke to a group of us following his speech on health issues. I meant this only to relieve any fears as you could act positively by being prepared for anything by getting some colloidal silver in the smallest microns available, for a mfg. of it has described testing it (in NV) by getting a sample from a lab there. How effective and in what doses I can find out, I think. BTW, the speaker did not refer to the silver, was just wanting to let us be aware of the need to bring our good intentions wherever we can to overcome the evil ones but not be blind to them. I have the most reliable source there is that Clinton alone was behind his order to lob missiles into Afghanistan the day after his deposition, whereas before him, Afghanis were receptive to listening to our pleas about bin Laden despite their welcoming his funding them. I think that if we weed them out of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the U.S. and wherever they are, but also come to a fair disposition of Israel, we may see less of these people who choose to follow a path of indiscriminate violence. If people had taken the time to assess their voting, we would have not seen a hampered intelligence due to extreme covert operations related to Cuba during the Kennedy era, which led to the Church Amendment, restricting intelligence too much, as did Carter further and of course Clinton deliberately undermined it. I also know for a fact that Albright and Clinton had the Cole put in harm's way to make a "friendly overture" in the Mideast. Too bad no one in the State Department had worldwide respect and admiration to do that, which should have been their purview. But as Mad Albright and the entire department under her did not earn it, because of all of their continual violation of confidential information, even to the point of not noticing Russians place a bug there, as anyone had free access anywhere, they could hardly connect with human beings in any part of the world, considering that they initiated the vendetta against a child, Elian Gonzalez. Clinton deliberately and continuously put the military in harm's way w/o the back-up they needed and weakened them at every opportunity.

[Outraged]

bump