How’s that 9/11 Commission reorganization working?
posted at 8:48 am on December 30, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Now that Barack Obama has finally admitted what everyone else knew — that the intelligence and security systems designed to prevent another 9/11 had failed with Umar Abdulmutallab — it’s time to ask what Obama and Congress plan to do about it. Eight years after 9/11, we have still not set up our system to “connect the dots” and prevent all attacks from occurring. We have prevented quite a few, including at least three plots this year, but as has been repeatedly pointed out, we have to get it right every single time, while our enemies only have to get it right once — and they adapt to every failure.
And when the failure is “systemic,” as Obama rightly said yesterday, we have a big, big problem:
The New York Times reported in Wednesday’s editions that the government had intelligence from Yemen before Christmas that leaders of a branch of al-Qaida there were talking about “a Nigerian” being prepared for a terrorist attack. The newspaper said the information did not include the name of the Nigerian.
Obama’s homeland security and counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, is due to present the president with an early report by Thursday, based on recommendations and summaries from across the government.
“There were bits of information available within the intelligence community that could have — and should have — been pieced together,” Obama said in a brief statement to reporters Tuesday.
“Had this critical information been shared, it could have been compiled with other intelligence, and a fuller, clearer picture of the suspect would have emerged,” Obama said. “The warning signs would have triggered red flags, and the suspect would have never been allowed to board that plane for America.”
Senior administration officials said the system to protect the nation’s skies was deeply flawed and, even then, the government failed to follow its own directives. They described a breakdown that would have been much worse had Abdulmutallab been successful; an angry Obama called the situation “totally unacceptable.”
“It now appears that weeks ago this information was passed to a component of our intelligence community but was not effectively distributed so as to get the suspect, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, on a no-fly list,” Obama said.
Four years ago, pushed by the 9/11 Commission, Congress reorganized the American intelligence community. The entire idea behind this reorganization was to make it easier to “connect the dots,” share information, reduce interagency feuding and improve coordination, and provide better analysis to decisionmakers to prevent information from slipping through the cracks as it did before 9/11. The commission recommended, and Congress demanded, that this reorganization take the form of slapping two extra layers of bureaucracy on top of the previous intel agencies, demoting the CIA director, and creating a national clearinghouse for information.
How is that working out? Not terribly well:
Intelligence officials began laying blame on other agencies.
The CIA said it worked with embassy officials to make sure that Abdulmutallab’s name made it into the government’s database of suspected terrorists and noted his potential extremist connections in Yemen. The CIA said it forwarded that information to the National Counterterrorism Center.
Intelligence officials say they learned the suspect’s name in November, when his father came to the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria and sought help in finding him.
One U.S. intelligence official said Abdulmutallab’s father didn’t provide sufficient information to earn him a spot on the no-fly list.
In the midst of this finger-pointing and blame-shifting, let’s remember that Abdulmutallab’s father provided the same information to the British, who found it compelling enough to immediately cancel his visa and add him to the no-fly list. Meanwhile, while Abdulmutallab trained to blow up NW253 and kill hundreds of people, the CIA and the Directorate of National Intelligence to which it reports busied itself with bureaucratic feuding:
Early last week, several long-festering bureaucratic issues that had arisen between Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair and CIA Director Leon Panetta had to be settled by national security adviser James L. Jones, through some Solomon-like decisions.
Blair’s four-year-old organization has been trying to establish its role as supervisor of all 16 intelligence agencies, particularly involving the CIA, the former top dog.
The CIA, by a 60-year tradition, has worked directly for every president. The agency usually did the President’s Daily Brief (PDB) — the overnight intelligence report for the chief executive — and the morning Oval Office oral briefing that accompanies it. Normally, the briefer was accompanied by the agency director or a top deputy. Questions from the Oval Office were immediately carried back to CIA headquarters in Langley, where case officers and analysts set out to answer them. The most important link was when it came to the CIA’s covert actions, which the president must authorize.
Now some of those links have been broken. Blair’s outfit prepares the PDB, and he or a deputy attends the Oval Office briefing. Though the PDB is often CIA-written and the briefers are primarily from the agency, the president’s questions are filtered through Blair’s group. The result: CIA personnel have been guarded about their remaining turf.
Does this sound like a streamlined organization, with reduced tensions and better cooperation, ready to defend America? Or does it sound like a dysfunctional mess, more concerned with turf wars than the war on terror? Perhaps the remarkable thing is how effective they have managed to be despite the mess Congress made of the intelligence community four years ago.
The criticism of the Obama administration in this instance mainly focused on Janet Napolitano and whether or not she should get fired. Ironically, she probably has less to do with this failure than anyone in the Obama administration’s security organizations. The failures that put Abdulmutallab had nothing to do with Homeland Security, and DHS has nothing to do with security at Schipol in Amsterdam. Napolitano’s egregious sin was to make the Orwellian claim that “the system worked” on Sunday’s talk shows when it had obviously failed. If her head should roll, it should be because she has utterly destroyed her credibility with the American public — but even that depends on whether she did that on her own, or whether she was ordered to do it by Obama. Practically speaking, though, either way she will eventually have to go, if for no other reason that Obama’s own statement showed her up … and Obama will probably need someone to fire by the time this is over.
This problem is one Barack Obama can even claim to have inherited, although once again in part from himself. The real problem lies in the 9/11 Commission’s reorganization of intelligence. Instead of taking the 16 agencies and merging them no more than two or three organizations and streamlining the flow from analysts to decisionmakers, Congress adopted the bureaucratic approach instead. The very problems they purported to solve, the interagency feuds and lack of data sharing, have reappeared in the exact same form as in 2001. In fact, the reorganization created turf wars at even higher levels than we had before. All of this was utterly predictable — and I predicted it repeatedly at Captain’s Quarters from 2004 to 2007.
Most Americans don’t care whether a Democrat or a Republican resides in the White House when it comes to national security; they just want the nation to defend itself properly against attack. The question of whether heads should roll is really secondary anyway. The problem isn’t so much the personnel — after all, Hillary Clinton didn’t get on the phone to embassies to instruct them to ignore critical information, and Leon Panetta didn’t deliberately keep dots from connecting. The big problem is the 9/11 Commission’s insane recommendations and Congress’ leap to implement them. That reorganization needs to be dismantled, and the intelligence community streamlined properly to rid itself of sclerotic and antagonistic bureaucracies. We need to reduce barriers to cooperative work, not create more of them, and we should have realized this five years ago and every day since.
Let’s quit worrying about firing people and focus on finally fixing a problem that we’ve only made worse since 9/11, before we run into a terrorist who manages to be competent about blowing himself up.
Update: My friend Tommy Christopher offers a limited defense of Napolitano while noting the foolishness of her statements.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
The truly think we are mushrooms to be kept in the dark and fed bullcrap!
Dread Pirate Roberts VI on December 30, 2009 at 8:54 AM
Titanic – deck -chairs
MikeA on December 30, 2009 at 8:54 AM
dear leader will tap jamie gorelick to fix this
/s
cmsinaz on December 30, 2009 at 8:55 AM
Superb analysis, Ed. I agree–the “heads should roll” tactic is outdated and doesn’t improve a darn thing except leaving in place the same, decrepit systems that fail to connect the dots they should be connecting. You’re right, “systems should roll” in this regard. We got damn lucky on Christmas, and we shouldn’t have to be relying on luck 8 yrs after 9/11. We should have this thing down pat by now.
ted c on December 30, 2009 at 8:58 AM
this will never change unless someone has the cajones to cut jobs within these agencies and I just don’t see that happening anytime soon…
cmsinaz on December 30, 2009 at 9:00 AM
Fox is reporting that the US knew of a terrorist plot before Christmas. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/29/obama-systemic-failure-allowed-terror-suspect-board-flight/
Let me see,, who was it that said you don’t want to waste a good crisis? Can’t remember.
Let me think for a moment,, if someone said something like that, would/could it not also mean that a crisis might be,, just might be something they would desire? Is that really way out there? Is it inconceivable to believe that the left would desire something they label as good? You know, like, a “good crisis.”
JellyToast on December 30, 2009 at 9:01 AM
I guess running the worlds best campaign ever isn’t the same as “executive experience” after all.
Mord on December 30, 2009 at 9:01 AM
Reorganization? We don’t need no stinkin’ reorganization. The system is working. Everything is going according to plan. We intended to allow the crotch bomber on the flight. We knew the detenator would not work properly and that the only thing he would accomplish was incinerate his wanker. Those passengeers who put out the flames before the bomb could explode were Department of Homeland Security Agents specifically assigned to the flight by me to do exactly what they did. We were always in control of the situation.
Your ever watchful friend,
Secretary Janet Napolitano
sdd on December 30, 2009 at 9:03 AM
The first problem that must be fixed is this administration doesn’t take anything seriously, including homeland security and national defense, except installing its radical domestic agenda.
With the smelly stuff flying off the fan almost daily now, the WH is locked down in a crisis management mode that assesses every action mainly for its political impact. We live in interesting times, and I expect 2010 to be a doozie.
petefrt on December 30, 2009 at 9:06 AM
Has obama called in sick for his PDB’s? Surely he would have been aware of a pending plot if he had been breifed. Or, does he have a stand in for this difficult type stuff?
I think he wanted to be King, not President. Presidentin is hard work. Kings have Prime Ministers to handle the tough stuff.
Key West Reader on December 30, 2009 at 9:09 AM
I say sharpen the guillotine.
Amadeus on December 30, 2009 at 9:09 AM
Good thing the adults are in charge, otherwise we might have some bureaucratic back and forth sniping while leaving the actual defense of planes up to the passengers themselves.
Oh, wait.
rbj on December 30, 2009 at 9:10 AM
The problem is….Obama hit the ground running, running for another term instead of running the country.
Obviously Bush did not complete his tasks, many things left undone, which is why we have someone to always replace an outgoing president…but this “president” doesn’t seem to be interested in doing anything to complete what Bush had started. If he did, then he would have to share it with Bush and he is not about to give credit to anyone but himself.
This is the most selfish, insecure, whining, politician I have ever seen.
Just stand up and say “The former administration begin the process, they laid a good foundation, now we must finish the job and complete the task laid out for us”….but noooooo, he can’t give any credit to any one on the other side of the aisle…unless they vote and support him, even if it destroys lives, Obama can’t give credit, or can’t complete a given task….re-inventing the wheel, wasting time, money, but he does save a few votes from his liberal fools….
right2bright on December 30, 2009 at 9:10 AM
I’d say you are right.
BetseyRoss on December 30, 2009 at 9:11 AM
The culture shift from the previous to the current administration is that there is no longer any pressure to to the uncomfortable work of actually focusing on potential terrorists. So much easier to treat all people the same, and continue to frisk the grannies at the airport. That attitude is going to get people killed. Until we take an approach closer to what the Isrealis use, we are not safe. Not profiling Muslims, just profiling terrorists.
iurockhead on December 30, 2009 at 9:12 AM
Ummm, maybe if Obama were to shift his focus from “transforming America” to “Protecting America”, we might have a little more faith in his efforts.
anniekc on December 30, 2009 at 9:14 AM
Its
Reagan’s….Bush’s(Insert here) fault!grapeknutz on December 30, 2009 at 9:14 AM
Re Pix caption:
I vote High Level Head Rolling….starting with El Presidente
Dingbat63 on December 30, 2009 at 9:15 AM
Oh for Heavens’s Sake.
Ed, please stop. You guys are politicizing this attack. You care more about bashing Obama than about a solution. Spending your time digging up any tidbit that might be related then hammering Obama over it.
Again, Christmas came on time for you guys. I just wish you guys had some shame.
Are you an American? Or a Republican? I’ve been saying this for the past couple days, and Politico did some leg work on this: Dems did not politicize the Reid bombing attempt. They acted like adults.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/31049.html
Tom_Shipley on December 30, 2009 at 9:16 AM
Get rid of DHS
blatantblue on December 30, 2009 at 9:16 AM
blatantblue on December 30, 2009 at 9:17 AM
wasn’t Bambi the one who said he could walk & chew gum at the same time (in re: McCain suspending his campaign to work on the TARP bailout).
well, its obvious that Bambi has been so busy working with Congress to socialize medicine that he hasn’t had time to secure our country.
would you want to be in this man’s military?
kelley in virginia on December 30, 2009 at 9:17 AM
A caller to a radio show yesterday brought up an excellent point. This happened to me at least 3 times, too, so I can vouch for its authenticity:
She got a call from her credit card company about a suspicious $19.95 charge on her credit card. With millions of customers, the company could flag a $20 freakin’ charge. Why can’t multiple government agencies DEDICATED to flagging suspicious characters do so with as much accuracy?
The answer is simple. The company doesn’t want to spend $20 it doesn’t have to spend. It’s motivated by self-interest. 90% of the time, the government isn’t motivated to do squat, and when it IS motivated, it is hampered by political motives and political correctness.
But the point is that it’s NOT HARD to flag potential terrorists and stop them. If we screw up, it’s not because the task was too difficult.
Daggett on December 30, 2009 at 9:17 AM
Why in the World would anyone in the CIA, FBI, NSA, TSA, or any other “intelligence” agency actually do their job effectively knowing full well Eric Holder will prosecute their arse??
Tim Zank on December 30, 2009 at 9:18 AM
The problems within the Intelligence Community are secondary, in my opinion, to the evil that is PC. Get rid of that, first.
OldEnglish on December 30, 2009 at 9:20 AM
shipley: the right HATES Janet Napolitano because of her name-calling (among other real issues). but Ed isn’t calling for her departure (though it would be sooooo sweet); Ed is saying let’s get to the root of this problem & fix it.
kelley in virginia on December 30, 2009 at 9:20 AM
Wow, that brought up a mental image I didn’t need.
Midas on December 30, 2009 at 9:21 AM
The US Intelligence Community never needed more bureaucracy, but more feet on the streets, and holding clerical employees responsible for fulfilling their work load, AND DEMANDING LEADERS COMMUNICATE OPENLY. No new bureaucracy eliminates personal jealousies between career politicians playing administrative roles in the CIA, FBI, etc. The sale pitch Bush used was that DHS would connect the COMMUNICATIONS between the CIA, FBI, etc.
The DHS FAILED. Terminate, abort mission. We still have our CIA, FBI, etc. It’s a matter of COMMUNICATION together with the POTUS in the Oval Office.
America already had more than enough Intelligence bureaucracy BEFORE Bush birthed the mutant federal DHS monster that only took ONE administrative transfer to turn against American Citizens, tagging every conservative and every military veteran a terrorist, while simultaneously enabling Jihad Terrorists.
Every layer of Bureaucracy only creates that many more dots to connect. Get back down to bare bones: the point is, EVERY EMPLOYEE IS OBLIGATED TO AN EXEMPLARY JOB PERFORMANCE. Otherwise, their services are no longer required–and that includes the POTUS.
Our security is only as good as our civic strengths.
That rule applies harshly to our government employees who represent the highest percentage of tax cheats nationally, and who do not fulfill their job descriptions and Constitutional Duties in office.
No matter WHO holds a job, so long as PC rules the day, we’re doomed.
PC IS SYSTEMIC FAILURE. It all boils down to terminating PC. PC prevents employees and troops and government from fulfilling Constitutional obligations of office. To permit the perpetuation of PC is proven foolish and enabling sabotage and ultimately treason.
Obama brought to Washington the PC administration gone wild with his so-called ‘ONE VOICE’.
FIRE: Reset Hillary, Sec. of Failed State–HER department failed in the SIMPLEST of communications.
FIRE: Reset Janet Incompetando who NEVER should have been granted access to ANYTHING significant, let alone set loose to ruin and abuse the DHS.
FIRE: Reset AG Holder should NEVER have been granted Senate approval given Holder’s deplorable conflicts of interest AGAINST THE US GOVERNMENT AND THE AMERICAN NATION, not only defending terrorists but ENABLING TERRORISTS TO PERPETUATE rather than prosecute and meet his official Constitutional obligations.
The buck stops at Obama’s desk. Remove the most incompetent intellectual potus fraud ever.
maverick muse on December 30, 2009 at 9:21 AM
Oh for heaven’s sake did you even read what Ed wrote?
gwelf on December 30, 2009 at 9:23 AM
Gee, I wonder how our coming health care bureaucracy will respond to threats like the Swine Flu?
Kafir on December 30, 2009 at 9:24 AM
He wants us all in poverty instead of getting the poverty-stricken out. I then ask myself, with that mentality, why maybe the ones already in poverty can never get out of it.
Loser mentality.
As far as planes go, well citizens had to jump up and save the day once again like flight 93 on 9/11. Making a rule now that we can’t even get up to stretch our legs is going hold us lible for violating FAA rules should citizens needs to bear their own arms literally in flight again to wrestle one of these nuts to the floor. Oh this is gonna be bad. This is utterly friggin bad.
johnnyU on December 30, 2009 at 9:24 AM
I don’t see that these are mutually exclusive. You have to fix the problem, *and* get rid of patently incompetent political tools. Napolitano, by her comments, demonstrates that she’s more worried about political ass-covering than fixing the problem.
Getting rid of her is *part* of fixing the problem.
Midas on December 30, 2009 at 9:24 AM
kelley in virginia on December 30, 2009 at 9:20 AM
Kelley, you’re right, this specific posting isn’t so bad. My reaction is more toward the cumulative postings of HotAir and it’s commentators since Christmas.
Those weren’t Democrats, dude, those are truthers, and they really aren’t owned by any political party. Most of them may be made up by the far left, but they are a small minority.
We’re talking mainstream here. High-ranking Republicans. And just the general sentiment overall of the right-wing in the country. At least the ones making the most noise.
Tom_Shipley on December 30, 2009 at 9:24 AM
Dick is right again:
CTSherman on December 30, 2009 at 9:25 AM
Explain to me how it is politicizing this attack by demanding that those responsible for our national defense do what is necessary to fix the ‘system’? Your definition of ‘politicization’ seems to include any sort of criticism of Obama. Even Obama said we had a systemic failure – we’re just demanding that he actually do something about it and demonstrate he takes this seriously.
gwelf on December 30, 2009 at 9:27 AM
I recall Democrats beginning their attacks on President Bush not too long after 9/11.
Then I remember the “Saudi Mantra.”
“Most of the hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, why aren’t we fighting them?! Oh, because we want oil from them blah blah.”
There was very little unity shown by the left after 9/11. It was short-lived and shallow in sincerity.
blatantblue on December 30, 2009 at 9:27 AM
That came from here:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/31054.html
CTSherman on December 30, 2009 at 9:28 AM
I agree that Obama has inherited a mess, but he has managed to compound the problem in a massive way.
An effective administrator is smart enough to realize that hiring competent employees makes the administrator look good, and results in a successful organization.
A narcissistic administrator hires people who will not look better than the administrator. The totally incompetent people that Obama has surrounded himself with have made an unmanageable situation something beyond ineffective, and extremely dangerous. They are not the people who would have any idea about how to quickly fix the system. The attributes of the tools (appointments) that Obama has at his disposal are even less than those that he himself possesses.
Yoop on December 30, 2009 at 9:29 AM
I assume this is Cheney, but whoever said this is an idiot.
Bush had an even MORE low-key response to a failed attempt to blow up an airliner.
This is such a transparent case of taking facts and spinning to meet a preconceived political narrative.
Tom_Shipley on December 30, 2009 at 9:29 AM
Agreed; let’s stop worrying about it and do it.
Sharpen the guillotine? Just use the dull rusty blade.
davidk on December 30, 2009 at 9:31 AM
As I said before, this post isn’t that bad, and I probably shouldn’t have posted my initial post in it.
But the overall response by HotAir and the right has been to politicize first, ask questions later.
Tom_Shipley on December 30, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Any takers that John Brennan (Obama Security Czar) replaces DHS Sec. Napolitano.
Sec. Napolitano has been a failure from day one. The reason President Obama picked her was because of her view and actions toward illegal immigration. She would let them all in as long as they checked the boxes on ballots that had a ‘D’ associated with it.
This Administration will not fix the problem because they have no idea what the real problem is.
MSGTAS on December 30, 2009 at 9:33 AM
I can’t believe our dear Commander-in-NeverDoneShit can’t manage this.
marklmail on December 30, 2009 at 9:34 AM
If it hadn’t had the timeline proximity to so many other current/hot acts of terrorism, you damn well know they would’ve – as they did at every opportunity as we got farther away from 9/11, Bali, etc.
Remember 2002 when the Dems were ‘on-board’ with Bush, anti-terrorism, war, etc? That’s the time period of which you speak – when polls supported such a notion and your ‘adult’ Democrats wouldn’t dare run counter to that sentiment.
As the polls went south, so did the ‘adult’ Dem behavior. Spare us the nonsense that they behaved as they did for any ‘adult’ responsible reasons. They did it for the same reason they do everything – preserve and maximize their political power base. Right/wrong has nothing to do with it.
Midas on December 30, 2009 at 9:34 AM
And your overall response is it’s Bush’s fault and Obama couldn’t have done anything to fix it…well, he can and must now so you should be agreeing with Ed instead of trying to find some excuse for Obama.
deidre on December 30, 2009 at 9:34 AM
I concur that the issue is the large bureaucracy of governmental agencies. A streamlined approach is more in tune with what needs to happen.
As a realist though, I have to state that I don’t think we can ever be ‘safe’ in this world. Anyone with the intelligence and will required, can cause havoc most anywhere they wish. The answer is to kill the enemy dead, dead, dead.
This country lost the will to fight and win sometime in the 50′s. It’s too bad that rules of engagement, and PC policies have gotten to where they are.
BierManVA on December 30, 2009 at 9:34 AM
The Dems created a system that’s incomplete, putting in only enough to say they’re for protecting the country. Then they stopped their ‘progress’.
How often, too, did they later decry legislation they helped pass all to snipe at Bush? What about the Dem fight to unionize airport security people, instead of passing legislation to secure the airports first, then worry about union status? At the time we needed better security, not more payers of union dues.
Whoever thinks this recent attack was a ‘Christmas present’ is lame and totally partisan, foolish and holding nothing more than a low opinion of conservatives while somehow praising other liberals. If there’s any ‘present’ to it, it’s that a bomb failed (this time) and passengers took the perp into custody.
Congress needs to fix this systemic failure right away, a first solution (and likely temporary) being to put any non-US citizen who’s on any list anywhere on our no-fly list. Non-citizens have no right to enter the US.
After that, fix the system for real this time, while also figuring out how this non-Christmas present happened. Those responsible for this event should then face whatever disciplinary action is warranted.
Liam on December 30, 2009 at 9:35 AM
Truly.
Obama tagged his own vice for us, ANTIPATHY; when attempting to smear conservative Americans, he resorted to a word his critics had truthfully applied to him that hurt. And Obama just can’t restrain himself from smearing his opponents, applying HIS pain on us to bear on his behalf. He’s going crazy getting the rejection of NO!
The overwhelming body of evidence proves that PC is systemic failure. Everywhere PC applies, failure results.
RESCIND PC
Require competent job performance from the top down and the bottom up, across the board.
LONG PAST TIME for Obama to allow Conservative Americans to contribute to our nation’s leadership. A quarter of the way through his only term, and Obama is tanking America like the Titanic, depriving the non-union citizens access to self defense or preservation of liberty and life.
2010 Voters, terminate the Washingtonian Majority of Marxists.
maverick muse on December 30, 2009 at 9:36 AM
How are people here politicizing this? Isn’t it Obama’s responsibility?
gwelf on December 30, 2009 at 9:36 AM
WATCH
Obama’s “fix” will be to instigate MORE BUREAUCRACY STILL, more dots to connect against the odds given Obama’s PC DOCTRINE.
maverick muse on December 30, 2009 at 9:37 AM
When the ODNI was created the first thing that happened was the removal of several hundred CIA operations officers and specialists from CIA to man the slots created in the new ODNI. They were given a multi-billion dollar budget by Congress. The government axiom “Spend it or lose it” prevailed. Thus, from the start, the number of one-the-street overseas operations officers was cut by more than half. Could not have dozens or hundreds of empty desks at ODNI, could we? ODNI had to look like it was on it…or at least put in a good appearance of such.
Next, bureaucratic imperative took over at ODNI. Fast promotions were given to the newly-created manning of ODNI, if they were the top dogs of the intel commnity, then they had to have the gravitas…in other words, one could not be an area chief at ODNI if one were a GS-15. Had to be an SIS-grade (a GS-god,in the parlance) and with that, the support staff grew, can’t be a GSA-god and answer your own phone or write your own memos, and in short order ODNI became a hard concrete barrier to effective intelligence operations.
Nothing CIA had previously done and approved within, with Congrssional oversight and NSC input. was permitted any longer without “oversight” and meddling at the ODNI-level.
Streamline the process?
Not one bit. Quite the contrary.
The ongoing rift between ODNI and CIA is not about making the intel cycle more responsive, noir merely about who gets to choose CIA Station Chiefs. It is about justification of the vast and growing ODNI machinery. Add any new layer of decision-making bureaucracy and fiscal approval to any enterprise and effectiveness wanes, plummets, actually.
From the ODNI perspective, CIA is just an “equal” along with NSA, DIA, ONI, FBI and all the other members of the subordinate intel community….right down to Department of Energy’s Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence and the Department of Commerce’s Office of Executive Support.
CIA is no longer the premier foreign intelligence agency, but merely one of about fifteen or so…all co-equal under the ODNI.
It is, for ODNI, nothing less than a blatant attempt to justify all those super-grade slots, and huge budget…in essence it is about inside-the-beltway power.
Imagine, if you will, a senior CIA area chief, who has reliable information about an event or group, and is in direct communication with a Station Chief and the ops officer on the ground in Fuzzystan, and wishes to act on that information.
In former days a CIA operational plan was put together, necessary ops officers and tech specialists were drawn up, funding approved and the op got underway, be it recruitment of a key foreign official or running a tech op against a major foreign entity.
Today, before any of that can take place, the appropriate ODNI “desk” has to be brought into the loop. Other agencies likewise will be brought into the loop. More people involved, more decision-makers wanting to chop off on the plan, and revisions made by other agencies…since all agencies under ODNI are “co-equal.” Days and weeks pass. What was designed to be a mouse is now an elephant. And along the way, should there be any possibility of failure, the plan may be scrubbed as too risky or perhaps not politically in line with one or more other agency heads.
Central Intelligence Agency. Accent on the Central.
Not anymore.
Once focused entirely on foreign intelligence operations, CIA, had its faults. Intelligence operations are not perfect, and risk is most often very high. Taking risk, is what we did. Variables abound, and no two operations are alike. Perfection is demanded, but perfection is never achieved. That is the nature of the intelligence business. If successful, kudos abound, the Nation is made more safe or an adversary bested, and the operation is heralded as unique, cutting edge, outside the box…and if it fails?
The risk-aversion that permeates the ODNI prevents risk-taking. That the present Congress, and the present Administration, have and are seeking to punish CIA risk-takers makes risk-taking at CIA something to be avoided. Risk taking, today, can be mounting an ops against a hard-target or something as mundane as forwarding a controversial memo over to ODNI.
Even with a Presidential Finding in hand, if a risky operation fails or angers some person in Congress, or in another agency…turf ownership is very important inside the Beltway…the officer(s) and Division Chief out at CIA will have to take the fall. Nobody at the White House has their six. Nobody.
This is just part of the problems created along with the creation of the ODNI. I could go on.
But, the key question is…is this anyway to run intelligence operations?
coldwarrior on December 30, 2009 at 9:38 AM
And I suppose you’ve had similarly sharp “don’t politicize this” comments for the Dems (including this administration) who’ve been openly spinning this, deflecting blame towards the Bush administration, etc?
Midas on December 30, 2009 at 9:38 AM
deidre on December 30, 2009 at 9:34 AM
I’ve never said it was Bush’s fault. I’ve never said it’s not Obama’s problem to own. My outlook was the same as it was when Reid failed to blow up that flight. First of, thank God he didn’t pull it off. Second, we have to figure out how to better screen people when they get on planes.
No one cared that Bush was on vacation. No one cared that he took 6 or 7 days to address the incident. You guys have shown yourselves to be the petty, vindictive partisans that you are with this latest attack on Obama and his administration.
Tom_Shipley on December 30, 2009 at 9:38 AM
gwelf on December 30, 2009 at 9:36 AM
don’t feed the troll
maverick muse on December 30, 2009 at 9:39 AM
Yes, he’s responsible. But taking this instant to claim he doesn’t think terrorism is a real threat, that he’s weak, that he doesn’t know what he’s doing, blah, blah, blah is politicizing it. And the right have been repeating those lines ad nauseam since Christmas.
Tom_Shipley on December 30, 2009 at 9:41 AM
It’s Schiphol, not Schipol, as far as I am aware (I’m cranky and nit-picky this morning. Best have another shot of Maker’s Mark and a Macanudo to help chill).
If you think our national intelligence bureaucracy works well, you’ll love nationalized health care!
mr.blacksheep on December 30, 2009 at 9:41 AM
Especially when he’s right.
Tom_Shipley on December 30, 2009 at 9:41 AM
Based on their actions, and inactions, it is tempting to think this.
I think, however, (and this is more chilling) is that they do know, and even welcome this kind of thing as an aid to further their marxist agenda.
I don’t think they counted on the size and force of the “opposition”: those “anti-Americans” who are rising up to defend our country from enemies, both “foreign and domestic.”
Those who love their country are having to fight a war on two fronts.
davidk on December 30, 2009 at 9:43 AM
Once a Federal bureaucracy is created it never goes away. Expect the dysfunction to not only continue, but to grow.
skeneogden on December 30, 2009 at 9:44 AM
coldwarrior on December 30, 2009 at 9:38 AM
Bravo!
Bureaucracies impede, impede, impede.
And professional jealousies are NEVER solved via bureaucratic policy.
You explain so well the specifics.
Our taxes should never fund cushy impediments directed against Constitutional Governance, against citizens, against national security.
Eliminating PC is yet the first step at preserving our national integrity.
maverick muse on December 30, 2009 at 9:48 AM
Tom, I note also that you want to characterize the criticism of Obama and his administration in this regard as coming from the right-wing, and lamenting it as such.
How do you explain the Democrat, left-wing media et al, who are saying the same things?
Midas on December 30, 2009 at 9:48 AM
Congress created this mess, now let’s see how long it takes them to address it. What will be top-priority–health care? Cap & trade? Amnesty? How long until Congress takes up the matter of improving airport security and all that goes with it?
And no, ‘investigations’ don’t count to me as taking up the matter. Investigations can be done internally by the respective agencies involved.
We need real Congressional action ASAP, before somebody gets a ‘Ramadan present’.
Liam on December 30, 2009 at 9:48 AM
Seriously. When you put the people who created the problems in a position to create solutions to the problems, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that they just create more problems.
AZCoyote on December 30, 2009 at 9:59 AM
so Ed, the embassy sent the info to CIA
CIA did nada, zip, zilch
still blame the SoS personally for this failure?
it would be ridiculous to do so
it is the same failure we had pre 9/11 as you point out, it was NOT Hill’s issue
and I suggest to you that this all comes top down from Obama who does not believe in the war on terror
ginaswo on December 30, 2009 at 9:59 AM
I recall, on 9/11 itself, the way some on the Left (it doesn’t matter who didn’t do that–it happened anyway from that side of the political aisle) criticized Bush for not going straight back to Washington while the country was under attack. I recall terms like ‘cowardice’ and ‘shirking his duty’, when in fact it was wise to keep the president out of danger. Should FDR have gone to Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941?
Some on the Left politicized 9/11 on that very day, maybe willfully but at least certainly ignorantly, to snipe at Bush.
Some need to clean their own houses before they point fingers at their neighbor’s.
Liam on December 30, 2009 at 10:00 AM
Jamie isnt the issue either it is CLEAR from who he made head of CIA and how he treats our intelligence officers that Obama DOES NOT WANT their help
what does CIA do, should they work ten times as hard and but heads with Team TOTUS or lay back and wait for something to happen so they can get back to work?
ginaswo on December 30, 2009 at 10:00 AM
I trusted Bush to look after my best interests vis-a-vis safety.
I do not trust Obama.
OldEnglish on December 30, 2009 at 10:01 AM
Self fulfilling prophecy.
True enough, you describe precedence.
But these times we face are NOT usual, but are becoming more radical daily, requiring firm resolve that begins with “No!” to progressive Marxism and holding firm the line of Constitutional Conservancy.
Defeat PC, and the fraud is exposed and VULNERABLE to its own defeat.
We are bankrupt. Even if Obama succeeded in taxing citizens 100% income (Ivy League exemptions or not) there’d not be enough money to save us from where Obama has already taken us, let alone where he continues to go down with perpetual spending. The throws of bankruptcy are merely muted by corrupt cover-ups, promises of benefits that will never be delivered, that only spread the damage of fiscal insolvency each day, each year, leaving us all the more vulnerable to the worst existence imaginable.
Bureaucracies only bloat the damage further. Better to repeal while we enjoy the semblance of order, than to abandon our only means for liberty. Apathy never cured any threat. Vote to defeat the Marxist Majority in Washington heralding the Democrat tag.
maverick muse on December 30, 2009 at 10:01 AM
We won’t even consider using an existing, proven successful system – i.e. The security system used by Israeli airlines. What makes you think that our bureaucrats in any of our multiple agencies will ever be able to ‘connect the dots’ no matter how they are ‘reorganized‘.
We might as well have the Department of Motor Vehicles take over airport security and let the Department of Homeland Security issue the licenses.
Uniblogger on December 30, 2009 at 10:02 AM
The bigger the bureaucracy, the higher the chance of blunders and the slower the reaction time.
albill on December 30, 2009 at 10:06 AM
BamBam built the WALL back, and it worked perfectly.
tarpon on December 30, 2009 at 10:12 AM
We already now how you pick and choose your links, I caught you in a lie the other day.
It was pretty well known that during 2001+ Bush was anti-terrorism, he named the axis of evil, he named the war on terrorism, he spoke weekly about terrorism and their continued attempts…that is what you liberals blasted him for “scaring us”, but you conveniently forgot about the lefts derision of Bush’s obsession with terrorism and keeping our nation safe.
This president of yours, has stopped the war on terrorism, by mandate. They can’t even use that term. He calls these “isolated” attacks, he is not at war, he does not concede terrorists want to destroy us, he has repeatedly downplayed terrorist links (Ft. Hood the most recent example until this one)…so naturally we look at Obama with jaded eyes…he has not done anything to secure us. And he has ignored the obvious signs. You just can’t ignore something and hope it goes away…which is what he does.
Bush begin the long process of securing our nation (and made mistakes, which is what happens when you make decisions and lead), and we expect a president to come in and “hit the ground running”, but we find he is not even walking towards security.
Obama reacts, Obama doesn’t pro-act, the difference between a leader, and a chump.
right2bright on December 30, 2009 at 10:14 AM
And Bush did not whine about Clinton’s lack of security or interest…Bush just went ahead and did what he had to, not whine about the “previous” administration.
right2bright on December 30, 2009 at 10:16 AM
I support our troops, period.
But I was skeptical of the Iraq war, not based upon the best intelligence touted internationally at the time (WMD), but because American involvement with Islam is not tolerated by Muslims. Yet Bush pulled off his own success against all odds, establishing for and with the Iraqi people, a real Constitutional Democracy that THEY created with our security help. But what Bush managed was unique for his own Zeitgeist, his own “compassionate conservative” response to the global Jihad 9/11 attack on the USA. GWBush proved his love for America, his true love for the USA, the best he could. And I supported him as our President because I knew and know that Bush loves America. Despite our differences in opinion, I credit Bush/Cheney for the security America enjoyed after 9/11/01.
Obama is the epitome of a so-called intellectual systemic failure.
Bush and all presidents appointed over 50% employees from the real world to administrate from the White House. Whereas, Obama’s administration eschews anyone not a Marxist academic or at least an academic brown-nosing enabler of authoritarianism. Of all Obama’s appointees, less than 7% have real world experience.
America suffers while Obama vacations, parties, and gets away from Washington.
GWBush made his Texas Ranch into his own personal Camp David, as another White House outside of Washington DC. Bush was NOT on vacation when he officiated from his ranch.
Obama spends our limited tax funds on RENT and jet setting excursions that have NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS OFFICIAL DUTIES as Potus.
maverick muse on December 30, 2009 at 10:17 AM
I strongly disagree. The system failed but the people running the system need to be held accountable. Nepolitano is a figurehead in this debacle more than anything else but it IS her job to break down those institutional barriers and connect the dots. It is the only real function of the Secretary of DHS considering the agencies that comprise the department all have their own budgeting processes and Nepolitano has no real ability to change what Congress allots to each of these entitites. In short, she and her staff are supposed to be the clearinghouse so that the intelligence concerning Abdulmutallab is utilized before he gets on the plane with a pantsload of PETN. DHS failed miserably and for Nepolitano it is the third strike and she needs to be replaced with a competent leader.
Beyond that, real reform cannot occur until this administration admits that there is a war on terror. They’ve treated both this latest attack and that at Fort Hood as criminal acts despite the fact that there appears to be common connections between the two events. Obama lacks the will and fortitude to fight the war on terrorism and we are essentially watching a repeat of the Clinton administration’s tepid responses that directly caused the 9/11/01 atrocities. Any reform in this environment would be meaningless because the administration doesn’t really believe its own rhetoric.
highhopes on December 30, 2009 at 10:19 AM
So Barry’s initial claim that the Christmas plane bombing attempt was the work of an “isolated” extremist demonstrates that he clearly understands the nature of the threat, right? And Barry’s DHS head doing the Sunday talk show circuit and claiming that “the system worked” is solid evidence that Team Barry know exactly what they’re doing (or do you think that Janet is some rogue player who didn’t bother checking with Team Barry for the approved talking points before going on her interviews?). And Barry’s continuing moronic insistence on closing Gitmo and treating foreign terrorists as criminal suspects deserving of the full panoply of U.S. Constitutional rights is definitive proof that he is not weak and foolish and fully comprehends the nature of the threat we face from Islamic terrorism?
The right has been making these points about Barry’s foolishness and ineffectiveness because they’re true. You and your loony left buddies can whine all you want that the criticisms of Barry are political, but that doesn’t change the fact that they’re accurate.
AZCoyote on December 30, 2009 at 10:22 AM
Oh, please.
Many prominent Democrats hinted the same thing. Among them, Dennis Kucinich and John Conyers, also Howie “Jet Screamer” Dean and even Hillary Rodham Clinton.
And later on, a 2007 poll found that:
35% of your party is therefore, by your own “logic”, Troofers. And 26% more of them may be Troofers as well.
Del Dolemonte on December 30, 2009 at 10:23 AM
The Constitutional requirements of an American President have always been dismissed by Obama the fraud.
B+rry’s agenda is the Deconstruction of the US Constitutional Republic. Otherwise, any distraction will do for him as he jet sets to conspire against the American citizenry, confering with global Marxist governance powers.
Defeat PC
Preserve Our Constitution and Bill of Rights for US Citizens
maverick muse on December 30, 2009 at 10:24 AM
And to add to the insult…Obama is more interested in unionizing the TSA then making it a better operation.
Obama is more interested in paying back his union cronies then protecting the nation.
right2bright on December 30, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Bush INHERITED 9/11 from Clinton’s administration.
George W. Bush never whined, but proved his nation’s honor.
Whereas, B+rry is a cry baby who refuses to accept responsibility and repudiates wisdom, being stuck on stupid perpetual juvenile delinquency.
Obama Lies. Americans Die.
maverick muse on December 30, 2009 at 10:28 AM
Questioning and criticizing the administration for their attitude toward terrorists and terrorism started long before Christmas. Off hand the “don’t jump to conclusions” and “shout outs” response to the Fort Hood shootings was equally criticized as proof that we are not safe under this President and his radical advisors. The CIA is being run by a professional political strategist, State is being run by a professional grifter with no foreign policy experience, DHS is being run by a complete idiot. We need serious people and instead we have a freakish combination of partisanship and political payoffs in key leadership positions. It is not politicizing to speak the truth and the truth is that Obama is not to be trusted on these issues.
highhopes on December 30, 2009 at 10:29 AM
AZCoyote on December 30, 2009 at 10:22 AM
Obama prides himself with word craft. His misapplication of “isolated” would be hilarious except that he’s threatening our lives with his stupidity.
maverick muse on December 30, 2009 at 10:31 AM
right2bright
don’t miss coldwarrior’s entry
coldwarrior on December 30, 2009 at 9:38 AM
maverick muse on December 30, 2009 at 10:32 AM
Goes to leadership. Obama has none.
Making decisions based on polls or perceived popularity is not leadership. It is simply taking the safer road.
Leadership sets tone, imparts spirit, makes the impossible seem probable, requires commitment to an ideal, a cause, a core belief. Leadership inspires. No written memos need be sent to cabinet departments or government agencies. Based on what is seen at the top, the perception that “this guy has it” or “this guy knows whereof he speaks” permeates down to all subordinate levels.
Leadership is not going on television night after night or daily and telling folks how to suck eggs. Leadership is not about creating an image. Leadership is not about pandering to consituencies.
Obama knows not of leadership. He has never led. Ever.
coldwarrior on December 30, 2009 at 10:38 AM
highhopes on December 30, 2009 at 10:29 AM
Touché
maverick muse on December 30, 2009 at 10:48 AM
Jack Bauer where are you!!!!
bwconq on December 30, 2009 at 10:49 AM
Does it really matter what the genesis of the statement was?
chemman on December 30, 2009 at 10:50 AM
Barry’s administration has
1) fostered a 9/10 climate where terrorism is not a real threat
2) created a mindset where generating a ‘profile’ of potential terrorists is discouraged
3) demoralized CIA and other intelligence officers by making them face procecution for doing their jobs…
It’s Barry’s fault… or Rahm’s if you believe Barry spends most of the time on the road and does little but read TOTUS.
phreshone on December 30, 2009 at 10:51 AM
You already admitted you were wrong with your first post troll boy.
aikidoka on December 30, 2009 at 10:55 AM
chemman on December 30, 2009 at 10:50 AM
Janet Incompetano never had any credibility.
She dug her own grave. Whether or not Obama ordered her to dig her own grave applies to Barry, not her, as she was already digging just by opening her mouth and issuing statements and official memos.
maverick muse on December 30, 2009 at 10:56 AM
Despite Rahm getting B+rry into the Oval Office, it is Barry’s fault. Whether he likes it or not, the buck stops with the potus.
maverick muse on December 30, 2009 at 10:58 AM
the person who needs to be fired is the moron at the top of the chain of idiots.
notagool on December 30, 2009 at 11:01 AM
How could this be Barry’s fault? How can he be responsible for policy when he’s innocently spending all his time on the golf course, or at the gym? Sheesh.
anniekc on December 30, 2009 at 11:04 AM
Do you honestly believe that the information was only sent to CIA. The embassy is a part of STATE it would have sent that information up channel in the STATE system also. So I don’t see where STATE is insulated from taking any blame. Since the buck stops with the head of the Agency that head should roll.
chemman on December 30, 2009 at 11:06 AM
While correct, it won’t happen.
chemman on December 30, 2009 at 11:07 AM
No argument there. She is responsible for what she said regardless of whether it originated in her pea-brain or came down from the “won.”
chemman on December 30, 2009 at 11:09 AM
It seems to me that the real barrier to effective intelligence gathering and action is Obama and Eric Holder’s willingness to sacrifice those who work for the Intelligence Community for political purposes…. who wants to take a risk of doing something that calls attention to ones self… if you don’t believe the guy at the top has your back, you aren’t going to protect his either.
2nd Ammendment Mother on December 30, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »