The question is perspective. This story makes sense to me.
It fits well the cause and effect that I have personally dealt with in cause and effect and stupidity and ignorance and wishful thinking choices.
CIA Officials Reveal What Went Wrong
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.
newsmax.com |
