Posted on 02/15/2002 7:22:05 AM PST by Plummz
(Washington, D.C.): So much for a rigorous review of the policy and other failures that contributed to the U.S. intelligence community's inability to detect and prevent the deadly attacks of September 11th. No sooner had members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committee's decided that these problems required a comprehensive review -- a review that would almost certainly implicate CIA Director George Tenet for his role in implementing defective policies, if not in every case initiating them -- than they turned over its conduct to one of Mr. Tenet's most trusted subordinates: L. Britt Snider.
This personnel decision sets the stage for a whitewash of epic proportions -- as if Sen. Sam Ervin had hired John Erlichman to run the Watergate investigation or Ken Lay's general counsel were tapped to run all the congressional investigations into the Enron debacle.
These invidious comparisons are hardly exaggerations. Britt Snider was, until last year, the Inspector General of the Tenet CIA. From 1997-98 he served as Special Counsel and advisor to Mr. Tenet. From 1989 to 1992, he was general counsel of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence when Mr. Tenet was its Staff Director. It is hard to imagine how such an individual could bring the sort of independence and dispassionate objectivity to the task that the Committee so clearly requires -- especially with respect to one of the Clinton and serving CIA Director, whose activities and judgment most demands the Congress' consideration.
It is, moreover, unclear at this writing whether Mr. Snider will be allowed to hire the rest of the staff charged with conducting this investigation. If so, it is entirely possible that none of those retained for that purpose will be able or willing to find fault with the intelligence community's past direction, priorities or conduct -- let alone that of the elected and appointed officials whose political and policy proclivities appear to have contributed to the 9/11 failure.
The Bottom Line
If the House and Senate Intelligence Committees are determined to give a complete pass to George Tenet and the direction he gave the community over the past five years, they might as well spare the taxpayer the expense of going through the motions of an investigation. If, on the other hand, they really do want to learn and apply the lessons of September 11th, they would be well advised to secure the services of those who have at least as much expertise in the field of intelligence as Mr. Snider, but not his disabling baggage of past institutional and personal loyalties.
All we need to do is look at the history of such investigations to realize that they serve not useful purpose, anyway. Congress is not interested in reigning in out of control government agencies. All Congress wants to do is put on their little dog and pony shows to try to fool the public into thinking that politics can be morally correct.
The Washington Post carried a story on Jan 30, 2001 which reported that Bush asked COngress to hold only closed door hearings with the House and Senate Intell Committees about the failures of 9/11 ( I posted the link in several of my replies). I predicted then that the White House would also try to limit(manipulate) even those closed door hearings. Well, the article in this thread now proves my prediction true.
Even if Bush and the FBI and CIA have nothing to hide, I wrote several replies (one got deleted with a "KNOCK OFF THE BULLSHIT" message!)that stated that Bush's actions gave the APPEARANCE of a coverup.
I want to repeat that even if the CIA, FBI and Bush are not culpable in any way, the secrecy of these hearings AND now limiting and manipulating even the closed door hearings does give the STRONG APPEARANCE of a coverup and does not inspire trust and confidence in Americans, not even in Conservative Christian Republicans who voted for Bush (me).
Open door, public hearings should be held to at least identify and correct any failures that were made.
For all the BushBots out there, don't not panic-- these failures could have all been accidental or based on incompetence or bad policies and decisions or personnel.
However, when I suggest that the FBI,CIA and Bush had forewarning and foreknowledge information (David Schippers & active FBI agents allegations) which if acted on MAY, I repeat, MAY have been used to avert the 9/11 attacks, that does not mean that I think that they deliberately had the WTC buildings attacked or allowed them deliberately to be attacked. Perhaps they had poor communications , individuals were incompetent or bad desisions and policies were in place?
But what is wrong with wanting to now fix any problems which kept this forewarning and foreknoweldge info from being acted upon adequately in the future to save American lives in a public way that maintains confidence, trust and unity?
Of course, certtain items will have to be discussed behind closed doors to protect legitimate security needs, but there is no need to now limit or manipulate the closed door hearings as this article suggests is being done and public hearings still should and can be held.
Well said. No one ever admits to incompetence. I think it's a mix this time.
I'm curious if that reasonable line of thinking is permissable anymore. Guess we'll find out. This sure wasn't --- SPY CASE IN CANADIAN COURTS SUGGESTS US NAVAL OFFICER HAD FOREKNOWLEDGE
Their credibility is shot and this is not about terrorism.
That was a FR link.
But it was mentioned on that thread that the Canadian newspaper report it was copied from was deleted too.
Interesting. I am glad now I saved a copy of the note that supposedly demonstrated advance knowledge of 9/11. This guy may be a con man, but if it can be proven that the note was written prior to 9-11, then there is something there worth looking at.
Of course that kind of talk can have you deleted.
You may want to add the Center for Security Policy (source of the article on this thread) to your excellent list of think tanks which you posted on another thread.
With High Regards,
OKCSubmariner
The note in the jailed 'spy' in Canada story is the key. A copy of the note is at the above address. If it was written before 9-11, it is significant. If written after 9-11, Vreeland is a con man.
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.