You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front
Pre-Attack Memo Cited Bin Laden
2002-05-15
The classified memorandum written by an F.B.I. agent in Phoenix last summer urging bureau headquarters to investigate Middle Eastern men enrolled in American flight schools also cited Osama bin Laden by name and suggested that his followers could use the schools to train for terror operations, government officials said for the first time today. The memorandum's existence has been known for months, but few details were available until recent weeks, when some lawmakers and Congressional staff members were allowed to read it. Before today government officials had not revealed that the memorandum included direct references to Mr. bin Laden.

Robert S. Mueller III, who did not become director until two weeks before the attacks, has acknowledged that the bureau gave the memo too little attention. Mr. Mueller has said the bureau lacked adequate analytical capabilities to evaluate it, a failing that he has tried to correct by establishing new analytical units within the F.B.I. and staffing them with new personnel.
This is the process known within bureaucratic circles as "shooting the wounded." Since something happened, some sort of blame has to be assigned to somebody. All that's produced is a political or public relations advantage for whoever has an ax to grind.

I saw Michael Isikoff on FoxNews this morning going over what they had, and it wasn't much. In the intel world there are always stray bits of data popping up that may or may not have any significance. They're referred to as "intelligence information," to distinguish them from "finished intelligence." The array of little stray bits is referred to as the "grass." Every once in awhile, like a snake, one will pop its head up above the grass and it can be tied to something else. Unless the bit of information is a conversation that says "we've hijacked the plane and we should hit the World Trade Center in above five minutes" analysts wait until they can connect that bit of information with another bit to build a "who-what-when-where-why" picture.

Conspiracy nits make much of the fact that Roosevelt "knew" the Japanese were going to bomb Pearl Harbor, using the grass as though it were finished intel. The brass also "knew" they were going to hit Alaska, that there was going to be no attack, that they were going to take Indonesia first, or Indochina... You get the picture. During the Gulf War, the Iraqis "knew" that Schwartzkopf was going to swing wide and nail their flank. They also "knew" that the Marines were going to stage an amphibious landing and whack the hell out of their 5th Mechanized Division. They probably also "knew" that the 82nd Airborne was going to take Baghdad, too.
Posted by:Fred Pruitt

#4  Fred: On this we completely agree. Blame probably was a very poor choice of words. I should and do know better than that from experience. (Sorry)Without saying alot- 20 years ago at a T-seminar we discussed the concept of ATO. The problem was every damn agency wanted to be in charge (natch.) And then there's this little problem with legality and Rights to dance around. ;-) The Homeland Office is as close as we have gotten publically, but without some cash to kick ass-- they have got a problem. This is getting closer to Clancy's OpsCtr. all the time.
Posted by: Mary Wehmeier   2002-05-17 16:49:11  

#3  I doubt even that there's "blame" for the people around him. Intelligence collection is a process of pulling needles out of a pretty big haystack, and it's not 100% effective. We're talking about four cells of five people each, plus a handful of support thugs in a population of 280 million. CIA is constrained by law from domestic intelligence collection, as is NSA. I presume DIA is as well, but this would have been outside their area of responsibility anyway. That leaves FBI and INS only, and we know INS is pretty much a loss, as they demonstrate every time they approve one of the late al-Qaeda thugs for flight school. FBI's foot is usually in a Congressionally- or court-mandated bucket, with restrictions of wire taps, surveillance and that sort of thing. This is actually a good thing, as it keep FBI as a criminal investigation organization rather than as a secret police. The country needs a competent and dedicated anti-terrorism organization that could take feeds from the other intel organizations and fill them out with its own collection, but that'll take money and there are many, many political ins and outs to step around lightly. We should be much further along that road than we seem to be now, but the same people who're jumping on the intelligence community now are the ones who put the obstacles in place and who should be taking an active part in setting up a real antiterror flying squad. I love watching hypocrits at work.
Posted by: Fred   2002-05-16 09:01:49  

#2  Fred: Every nutcase on the planet is going to try to pin this one on GW for not doing anything. Trouble is... he's only as good as the people who work for him, and it's possible someone dropped the ball. Mary Lu
Posted by: Mary Wehmeier   2002-05-15 22:52:09  

#1  I think I liked it without the shadow on the logo.
Posted by: Anonymous   2002-05-15 14:10:59  

00:00