Where Does The Buck Stop In The Knickerbomber Intelligence Failure?

The UK Daily Mail Online is reporting that the CIA is not pleased with Obama in the wake of inconsistent statements he’s made on the Christmas “knickerbomber” case:

Barack Obama was accused of double standards yesterday in his treatment of the CIA.

The President paid tribute to secret agents after seven of them were killed by a suicide bomber in Afghanistan.

In a statement, he said the CIA had been ‘tested as never before’ and that agents had ‘served on the front lines in directly confronting the dangers of the 21st century’.

He lauded the victims as ‘part of a long line of patriots who have made great sacrifices for their fellow citizens and for our way of life’.

Yet the previous day he had blasted ‘systemic failures’ in the CIA and other U.S. intelligence agencies for failing to prevent the Christmas Day syringe bomb attack.

Wait a minute…since when does a leftist like Obama use the word “patriot”  unironically?

Moving right along…

Some CIA officials are angry at being criticised by the White House after Abdulmutallab, 23, was allowed to slip through the security net and board a US-bound flight in Amsterdam despite evidence he was a terror threat.

The president complained that a warning from the former London engineering student’s father and information about an al Qaeda bomb plot involving a Nigerian were not handled properly by the intelligence networks.

But CIA officials say the data was sent to the US National Counterterrorism Centre in Washington, which was set up after the 9/11 attacks as a clearing house where raw data should be analysed.

Agents claim that is where the dots should have been connected to help identify Abdulmutallab as a threat.

Why do you suppose “the system” failed for Obama?

James Carafano at the Foundry notes:

This is the same system that stopped the London-based terrorist plot in 2006. On that occasion, intelligence connected the dots; counterterrorism agents penetrated the conspiracy; Homeland Security developed countermeasures; and with international partners the U.S. took down the terrorists before any bomber got near a plane.

Obama had the same system at his disposal as the last president. One built between 2002 and 2008 in the aftermath of the first wave of terrorist attacks– 9/11; the anthrax letters; and Richard Reid, the shoe bomber. A system that President Bush drove day-in and day-out, 24-7-365 to find and stop terrorist threats before they got off the ground. That’s why the 2006 plot and 26 other plots since 9/11 (21 under the Bush presidency) were found out and stopped. What Obama did not explain is how it worked for the last president, but failed for him.

This report, posted by The Prowler on December 29 offers some clues as to why dots were not connected:

“We have agreements with a number of different countries that work with us cooperatively on intelligence matters,” says the State Department employee. “A number of the treaties work through our justice departments or foreign offices or intelligence and interior or homeland security agencies. Several departments here in Washington got the information from London and it didn’t trigger anything within our own system.

This employee says that despite statements from the Obama Administration, such information was flagged and given higher priority during the Bush Administration, but that since the changeover “we are encouraged to not create the appearance that we are profiling or targeting Muslims.

Could this episode just be the natural result of an administration that doesn’t take the war on terror seriously, indeed, doesn’t even believe in such a thing?

Charles Krauthammer seems to think so:

The reason the country is uneasy about the Obama administration’s response to this attack is a distinct sense of not just incompetence but incomprehension. From the very beginning, President Obama has relentlessly tried to downplay and deny the nature of the terrorist threat we continue to face. Napolitano renames terrorism “man-caused disasters.” Obama goes abroad and pledges to cleanse America of its post-9/11 counterterrorist sins. Hence, Guantanamo will close, CIA interrogators will face a special prosecutor, and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will bask in a civilian trial in New York — a trifecta of political correctness and image management.

And just to make sure even the dimmest understand, Obama banishes the term “war on terror.” It’s over — that is, if it ever existed.

Obama may have declared the war over. Unfortunately, al-Qaeda has not. Which gives new meaning to the term “asymmetric warfare.”

This may explain the odd detachment that  many have noticed in Obama’s statements about the “alleged” terror plot.

None of this is supposed to be happening.

One thing is for sure – pretending that there is no war on terror, and giving terrorists civil liberties that only American citizens should enjoy, plays right into our “alleged” enemies’ hands.

Hat tip:

Pundette: Obama denies he’s in denial of terrorism

RELATED:

Frugal Cafe:

Unacceptable: Team Obama Knew 3 Days before Christmas Day Jihadist Attack of Escalating Holiday Terrorist Threats (video)

Red State:

Could this actually be the greatest and potentially the deadliest of Obama’s screw ups so far?

Middle East Perspective’s Rick Francona gives props to some valuable  allies in the Middle East:

Jordan loses a soldier in Afghanistan

Share

2010 May Not Be So Great Economically

Some are saying that hyperinflation, (the likes of which have been seen in third world dictatorships like Mugabe’s fascist Zimbabwe), is just around the corner.

Doug Ross @Journal (always a great place for cheery economic news) reports: The U.S. has no way of avoiding a financial Armageddon:

Bankrupt sovereign states most commonly use the currency printing press as a solution to not having enough money to cover obligations. The alternative would be for the U.S. to renege on its existing debt and obligations, a solution for modern sovereign states rarely seen outside of governments overthrown in revolution, and a solution with no happier ending than simply printing the needed money. With the creation of massive amounts of new fiat dollars (not backed by gold or silver) will come the eventual destruction of the value of the U.S. dollar and related dollar-denominated paper assets.

What lies ahead will be extremely difficult, painful and unhappy times for many in the United States. The functioning and adaptation of the U.S. economy and financial markets to a hyperinflation likely would be particularly disruptive. Trouble could range from turmoil in the food distribution chain to electronic cash and credit systems unable to handle rapidly changing circumstances. The situation quickly would devolve from a deepening depression, to an intensifying hyperinflationary great depression.

American Thinker: 2010 Will Be Worse

The year 2010 is likely to be the pivotal year where pundits stop referring to the recession and begin openly talking about a depression.

Our economic problem is rather simple to describe: There is too much debt relative to income and/or wealth.

Read the whole thing…the unsettling conclusion:

The possibility of losing our form of government is a real risk under any of the alternatives. So is civil unrest and strife. All are probably more likely under alternative 1 because of the corrosive effects of high inflation combined with a depression.

Beware the turn of the calendar. Things are going to get interesting, and probably very quickly.

Scary looking charts at both locations.

And just to remind everyone, once again, Tea Partiers scrambled and began screaming NOOOOOOO! to Obama’s insane spending sprees starting in February 2009. Yes, this problem has been years in the making, (with liberals deserving the brunt of the blame), but Obama  made a bad situation worse, cut off escape hatches, and hastened our demise.

Thanks to Retired Geezer for the cartoon!

Previously:

Obama Worried That Debt May Lead To Double-Dip Recession


Share