| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Agencies often miss warning signs of attacks |
| 2013-04-28 |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #13 The acceptable losses stratagem is understandable in certain cases like the bombing of England during the war to hide radars effectiveness. In cases like this I have a hard time distinguishing betwee a valid intelligence reason and the prevailing PC narrative about the RoP and the politics of the left. How many losses are acceptable to maintain a tenuous and possibly not unique lead to ....whom? |
| Posted by: AlanC 2013-04-28 13:19 |
| #12 Yes, a cock-up. The "acceptable level of losses' stratagem".... entirely plausible, and sadly, beginning to look more so. Well, quite honestly, if your job is source-reporting and dissemination, and your only source is arrested and taken out of circulation, you're out of a job and no longer productive. All too often, the game within the IC has been numbers, and reporting for the sake of reporting. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-04-28 12:36 |
| #11 "may," Pappy? :-( |
| Posted by: Barbara 2013-04-28 12:30 |
| #10 To simply throw our hands into the air and say "well Leonard, it appears we've cocked this one again" [as COL Hunt suggested last evening on Fox], is unacceptable. It may also be that "it appears we've cocked this one again" is part of an 'acceptable level of losses' stratagem. Eggs will be broken, and all that. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2013-04-28 12:13 |
| #9 4. "any attempts to portray the relationship as a link between the security agency and the two terrorists was 'absurd" = No, the absurdity is there allegedly WERE NO LINKS !!! |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-04-28 11:49 |
| #8 Link to #5 'I, of course, retired from CIA in 1987 and had moved on to working as a senior political scientist for RAND.' He said his son-in-law showed no interest in the agency or politics but spoke generally about his family in Chechnya. He said any attempts to portray the relationship as a link between the security agency and the two terrorists was 'absurd'. 1. "Of course I retired from..." = 4 Pinocchios, possibly 5. 2. "Began working at RAND" = Where I helped shape policy. 3. "Saw no interest in the agency" = Declined or was deemed unacceptable [too dirty] for witting recruitment. 5. "Spoke generally about his family in Chechnya" = Possesses placement and access, likes to talk, continue long-term accessment. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-04-28 11:46 |
| #7 As we like to say on medicine rounds each morning, "you don't find what you don't look for." |
| Posted by: Steve White 2013-04-28 11:35 |
| #6 The "alternative"....? Your "prevailing elite narrative" is certainly a key component or enabler, but I strongly believe Nadal Hasan and these Chechnian monsters were being monitored for terrorist leads, contacts, and reporting. I'm not entirely certain the original 9/11 suicide jihadists were not being exploited similarly. In intelligence parlance, each of these people possessed key placement and access. Shortly after the Fort Hood terrorist incident, US born terrorist [and coincidently, key Hasan confident] Anwar al-Awlaki was terminated via drone. Now that the brothers Tsarnaev have been neutralized, the Russians are conducting a broad terrorist sweep. Our own intelligence and law enforcement community appears to be conducting a similar effort, albeit more discreetly, right here at home. Intelligence leads and access within the worldwide radical Islamic community are precious and few. To simply throw our hands into the air and say "well Leonard, it appears we've cocked this one again" [as COL Hunt suggested last evening on Fox], is unacceptable. Forgive me for sounding like a broken record, but I wish someone in the congress or the media would turn to CIA Director John Brennan along with former Director Leon Panetta and ask.... ok, your time is up, what the fok was going on at Fort Hood, Benghazi, Boston, and elsewhere? |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-04-28 11:30 |
| #5 For what it is worth--salt to taste. The uncle of the two suspected Boston bombers in last weekÂ’s attack, Ruslan Tsarni, was married to the daughter of former top CIA official Graham Fuller |
| Posted by: Anging Hatfield6648 2013-04-28 11:27 |
| #4 Then there are the conspiracy theories that offer tangents that explain some of the bumbling. |
| Posted by: Anging Hatfield6648 2013-04-28 11:18 |
| #3 Besoeker, beyond belief? Well then what's the alternative? Could it be that the prevailing elite narrative precludes anything remotely effective for PC & political reasons? Could it be that doing anything that might upset CAIR et al is far more horrible than a few dead citizens? Where are your priorities? More to the point, where are theirs? |
| Posted by: AlanC 2013-04-28 08:37 |
| #2 To accept the notion that our intelligence and law enforcement game [more than a decade after 9/11 and repeated warnings from foreign intelligence] is so bad, so bumbling that we simply missed two Chechen military age males, one prone to domestic violence, a radical, nut-case mother and dysfunctional family like tis one, is way, way beyond belief. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-04-28 08:33 |
| #1 (It's also not clear why the Russians would warn the FBI about Tsarnaev's radical interests and then, apparently, not have done more to keep tabs on him while he was on his lengthy trip to Russia.) The Russians did precisely what we asked them to do [conduct surveillance and report]. Do not spook him off target. Then after the incident in Boston, the Russians arrested 140 people suspected of having terrorist connections, for questioning. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-04-28 08:10 |