January 17, 2006

Dangerously Incompetent

Bush's massive illegal NSA spying program swamped FBI agents in the wake of 9/11 and distracted them from more productive work:
More than a dozen current and former law enforcement and counterterrorism officials, including some in the small circle who knew of the secret eavesdropping program and how it played out at the F.B.I., said the torrent of tips led them to few potential terrorists inside the country they did not know of from other sources and diverted agents from counterterrorism work they viewed as more productive.

"We'd chase a number, find it's a schoolteacher with no indication they've ever been involved in international terrorism - case closed," said one former F.B.I. official, who was aware of the program and the data it generated for the bureau. "After you get a thousand numbers and not one is turning up anything, you get some frustration."
And yet it apparently comes to this: rather than impeaching an idiot President who broke the law, the USA wants to argue about whether his law-breaking was productive:
The differing views of the value of the N.S.A.'s foray into intelligence-gathering in the United States may reflect both bureaucratic rivalry and a culture clash. The N.S.A., an intelligence agency, routinely collects huge amounts of data from across the globe that may yield only tiny nuggets of useful information; the F.B.I., while charged with fighting terrorism, retains the traditions of a law enforcement agency more focused on solving crimes.

"It isn't at all surprising to me that people not accustomed to doing this would say, 'Boy, this is an awful lot of work to get a tiny bit of information,' " said Adm. Bobby R. Inman, a former N.S.A. director. "But the rejoinder to that is, Have you got anything better?"
Bottom line is, as with Saddam's WMDs, there was never anything there to find:
The law enforcement and counterterrorism officials said the program had uncovered no active Qaeda networks inside the United States planning attacks. "There were no imminent plots - not inside the United States," the former F.B.I. official said.
So now FBI head Robert Mueller is saying that he took note of the illegality of the spying program but "deferred to Justice Department legal officials". Mueller's staff say he never raised the issue of legality with them (did they raise it with him?). Another witch-hunt? Or another Bush Co. fool to be brought down?

Bottom line is, this was all just a massive cock-up:
F.B.I. field agents, who were not told of the domestic surveillance programs, complained that they often were given no information about why names or numbers had come under suspicion. A former senior prosecutor who was familiar with the eavesdropping programs said intelligence officials turning over the tips "would always say that we had information whose source we can't share, but it indicates that this person has been communicating with a suspected Al Qaeda operative." He said, "I would always wonder, what does 'suspected' mean?"

"The information was so thin," he said, "and the connections were so remote, that they never led to anything, and I never heard any follow-up."

In response to the F.B.I. complaints, the N.S.A. eventually began ranking its tips on a three-point scale, with 3 being the highest priority and 1 the lowest, the officials said. Some tips were considered so hot that they were carried by hand to top F.B.I. officials. But in bureau field offices, the N.S.A. material continued to be viewed as unproductive, prompting agents to joke that a new bunch of tips meant more "calls to Pizza Hut," one official, who supervised field agents, said...

F.B.I. officials may seek to minimize the benefits of the N.S.A. program or distance themselves from the agency. "This wasn't our program," an F.B.I. official said. "It's not our mess, and we're not going to clean it up."
So Boy George, upon hearing of the 9/11 attacks, sat in a kindergarten for seven full minutes, then went into a blind panic and authorized whatever needed to be done, legal or otherwise. Which is just what the PNAC authors wanted him to do.

The pity is that a more educated and well-travelled US President might have shown more spine and resolve, particularly if he had experienced even a sliver of life in terrorist-plagued countries like Spain (ETA) or Britain (IRA). Personally, I lived in both those countries and confronted the very real threat of a bomb on the way to work EVERY SINGLE DAY for years. The way to combat terrorism is not to give in to fear, but to overcome it again and again and again. Fear is exactly the response that the terrorists want to elicit, which is why Osame Bin Laden is so far winning the "war" hands-down.

As Al Gore said in his speech today:
Fear drives out reason. Fear suppresses the politics of discourse and opens the door to the politics of destruction. Justice Brandeis once wrote: "Men feared witches and burnt women."

The founders of our country faced dire threats. If they failed in their endeavors, they would have been hung as traitors. The very existence of our country was at risk.

Yet, in the teeth of those dangers, they insisted on establishing the Bill of Rights.

Is our Congress today in more danger than were their predecessors when the British army was marching on the Capitol? Is the world more dangerous than when we faced an ideological enemy with tens of thousands of missiles poised to be launched against us and annihilate our country at a moment's notice? Is America in more danger now than when we faced worldwide fascism on the march-when our fathers fought and won two World Wars simultaneously?

It is simply an insult to those who came before us and sacrificed so much on our behalf to imply that we have more to be fearful of than they. Yet they faithfully protected our freedoms and now it is up to us to do the same.

2 comments:

Wadard said...

Neat

Jaraparilla said...

syndir,

I do not understand... what are you trying to say?

Pages

Blog Archive