Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_urchin who wrote (10968)	6/20/2005 1:48:01 PM
From: Skywatcher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

FBI Counterterror Officials Lack Experience, Lawyer Says By David Johnston The New York Times Monday 20 June 2005 Washington - A lawyer who interviewed a number of top current and former counterterrorism officials at the F.B.I. in connection with a lawsuit against the bureau has written to three senators saying the officials lacked a detailed understanding of terrorism and had been promoted to top jobs despite having had little experience in the field. In a 15-page letter, the lawyer, Stephen M. Kohn, wrote that the F.B.I.'s top counterterrorism officials said in sworn depositions that they did not know the relationship between Al Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiyah, a South Asia offshoot of the terror network. Nor were they aware of the link between Osama bin Laden and Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, a spiritual adviser to Mr. bin Laden with whom he had been associated since the 1980's. Mr. Kohn said the F.B.I. director, Robert S. Mueller III, in his deposition, seemed unsure of Mr. bin Laden's relationship to Sheik Rahman, who is better known as the blind sheik and was convicted in 1996 on terrorism charges. Asked if he was aware of their relationship, Mr. Mueller is quoted in Mr. Kohn's letter as saying he was not. Mr. Kohn's June 17 letter was written to two Republicans, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, and one Democrat, Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, each of whom has long had an interest in F.B.I. matters. Mr. Kohn said in the letter that he was disclosing the information from the depositions at Mr. Grassley's request. "Since 9/11 and up to today, the F.B.I. has been led by managers without counterterrorism experience or background especially in Middle Eastern terrorism, and their testimony under oath is that they are learning about counterterrorism on the job," Mr. Kohn wrote. Mr. Kohn's complaints, although clearly advocacy statements by a lawyer pressing his client's legal claims, are likely to be taken more seriously because they are similar to the findings of reports by recent independent review panels that have criticized the bureau's progress in correcting the flaws exposed by the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Those complaints have complicated the F.B.I.'s efforts to reorganize its counterterrorism operations without outside intervention and have renewed a discussion in government intelligence circles about whether the bureau is moving fast enough to make improvements. In a statement on Sunday, Cassandra M. Chandler, assistant director for public affairs at the F.B.I., said: "It is extremely difficult to respond to selected excerpts drawn from a much larger body of information which was provided by the government as part of a civil lawsuit. The F.B.I.'s post-9/11 transformation involves nothing less than the complete reshaping of our work force." A former F.B.I. official, Pasquale J. D'Amuro, who recently retired as head of the bureau's office in New York, said on Sunday that experience in counterterrorism was helpful for managers but added that it was one of a number of leadership qualifications that were important in filling crucial posts. Mr. D'Amuro said he had provided a deposition in the lawsuit and discovered errors in reading a transcript relating to his work experience and mistakes in the names of associates with whom he had worked at the F.B.I. F.B.I. officials have long said that the bureau did not have a large pool of trained counterterrorism managers to draw on after the Sept. 11 attacks in its effort to expand and reorganize its counterterrorism operations. Instead, they said, the F.B.I. had sought to fill its managerial ranks with senior agents who were regarded as strong leaders and reserved specialized counterterrorism training primarily for agents and analysts further down the career ladder. Some agents have extensive knowledge of Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. One senior manager, Gary M. Bald, who heads the bureau's counterterrorism division, is best known for his leading role in the investigation of the sniper killings in the Washington area in 2002 when he headed the F.B.I. office in Baltimore. In his deposition, he said his training in counterterrorism had been learned on the job. In an effort to rebut the statements of F.B.I. officials who said that no expertise in counterterrorism was needed to be a senior manager in the field, Mr. Kohn quoted a deposition by a former F.B.I. counterintelligence agent, Edward J. Curran. "I don't know how you could be a leader with no expertise," Mr. Curran is quoted as saying. "The people you are supervising and coming in contact with would know within 24 hours that you don't know what the hell you're talking about. So how are you going to lead and address people and have them follow you if you don't have a clue what's going on?" In his deposition, Mr. Mueller was asked whether he knew that Mr. Bald lacked counterterrorism experience when he took the job as head of the counterterrorism division. Mr. Mueller is quoted in the letter as replying, "I don't think that's accurate." Mr. Kohn, who has had several well-known F.B.I. whistle-blowers as clients, represents Bassem Youssef, the bureau's most senior Arab-American agent. Mr. Youssef, a United States citizen born in Egypt, once ran the Riyadh office and now works at the F.B.I.'s headquarters. Mr. Youssef has filed a lawsuit complaining that after the Sept. 11 attacks, he was unfairly kept out of counterterrorism matters because of his ethnicity. He speaks fluent Arabic and has extensive knowledge of the Middle East and terrorist organizations. The Riyadh office was sometimes troubled. F.B.I. officials have said that Mr. Youssef was effective in building relationships with the Saudis but less efficient as a manager. As the workload grew heavier, with more leads to run down and more frequent requests for information, the office sometimes seemed overwhelmed, officials have said. -------

To: sea_urchin who wrote (10968)	6/20/2005 6:55:59 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

OT OT Searle, Re: And for nothing -- except maybe an ego trip for those who run the US although I even doubt that. No, not for nothing is 1/4 of the U.S. taxpayer money directed at Iraq ended up in the hands of mercenaries. Not for nothing, in fact, the exact opposite, for extravagant profits for the likes of Halliburton, Custer-Battles, CACI, Blackwater and the other war profiteers. warprofiteers.com *** George Bush has transcended concerns about popularity. In the U.S., his party controls the voting apparatus and thus there is nothing to fear from the opposition. And worldwide, Bush can assume the same surly attitude that Rome's Caligula did when he declared "Oderint dum metuant" - Let them hate as long as they fear me.

To: sea_urchin who wrote (10968)	6/21/2005 2:58:26 AM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

The good is the Bush Crime Family is making money hand over fist: A half trillion dollars extra into "defense" spending, a quarter trillion a year in heroine back on the market, and the windfall oil profits are running just shy of another trillion a year. Of course the benefits are only benefiting the Bush Crime Family, while everyone else in the world picks up the tab for their fun.

To: sea_urchin who wrote (10968)	6/21/2005 9:09:36 AM
From: sea_urchin	Respond to of 20039

> And for nothing -- except maybe an ego trip for those who run the US. tompaine.com >>Why George Went To War Russ Baker June 20, 2005 The Downing Street memos have brought into focus an essential question: on what basis did President George W. Bush decide to invade Iraq? The memos are a government-level confirmation of what has been long believed by so many: that the administration was hell-bent on invading Iraq and was simply looking for justification, valid or not. Despite such mounting evidence, Bush resolutely maintains total denial. In fact, when a British reporter asked the president recently about the Downing Street documents, Bush painted himself as a reluctant warrior. "Both of us didn't want to use our military," he said, answering for himself and British Prime Minister Blair. "Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option." ...today, as public doubts over the Iraq invasion grow, and with the Downing Street papers adding substance to those doubts, the Herskowitz interviews assume singular importance by providing profound insight into what motivated Bush—personally—in the days and weeks following 9/11. Those interviews introduce us to a George W. Bush, who, until 9/11, had no means for becoming "a great president"—because he had no easy path to war. Bush wanted a war so that he could build the political capital necessary to achieve his domestic agenda and become, in his mind, "a great president." Blair and the members of his cabinet, unaware of the Herskowitz conversations, placed Bush's decision to mount an invasion in or about July of 2002. But for Bush, the question that summer was not whether, it was only how and when. The most important question, why, was left for later. Eventually, there would be a succession of answers to that question: weapons of mass destruction, links to Al Qaeda, the promotion of democracy, the domino theory of the Middle East. But none of them have been as convincing as the reason George W. Bush gave way back in the summer of 1999.<< antiwar.com >>Will President Bush ever tell us the real reason why he committed America's treasure, the lives of American soldiers, and the reputation of our country to war in Iraq? Does he even know?<<