Tenet Resigns

June 3, 2004 8:25 AM

George Tenet resigns as CIA director.
posted by zedzebedia (83 comments total)

After much digging around, I stumbled on this obscure source which reports a similar story.
posted by dhoyt at 8:32 AM on June 3, 2004

I had no idea! What an amazing find!
posted by xmutex at 8:33 AM on June 3, 2004

It's a death defyin' life I lead,
I take my chances.
I die for a livin' in the movies and TV.
But the hardest thing I ever do
Is watch my leadin' ladies
Kiss some other guy while I'm bandagin' my knee.

I might fall from a tall building,
I might roll a brand new car.
'Cause I'm the unknown stuntman that made Redford such a star.

I never spend much time in school
But I taught ladies plenty.
It's true I hire my body out for pay, Hey Hey
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:34 AM on June 3, 2004

I nominate Special Agent Dale Cooper for the job.
posted by xmutex at 8:38 AM on June 3, 2004

C_D: I just want to acknowledge that I got that joke and laughed openly.
posted by Prospero at 8:39 AM on June 3, 2004

Dumb thread, but Civil has rescued it.
posted by COBRA! at 8:39 AM on June 3, 2004

"I think history will either vindicate him or say, 'Hey there was a problem there'," Hastert said.
posted by cohappy at 8:39 AM on June 3, 2004

Good that that trouble-maker has finally been gotten rid of. America is finally back on track. The grownups are in charge.

*twitch*
posted by soyjoy at 8:40 AM on June 3, 2004

did he make a deal not to rat on the bushies? or his he the next paul o'neill? for the good of the country george ... don't protect the establishment - be humble, be truthful - and share what needs to be shared about 9-11, WMD, Valerie Plame, Chalabi, and all the bs.
posted by specialk420 at 8:41 AM on June 3, 2004

It's strange to read a thread about Tenet resigning for "personal reasons" only to realize that the nearby Ads by Google are "Articles on Gay Marriage" and "God and Homosexuality".

Did something more than WMDs go sour? Is Tenet moving up here to MA?
posted by robocop is bleeding at 8:48 AM on June 3, 2004

I believe tha CIA appointments remain even after the administration changes. If this is correct, a Bush-appointed chief of the CIA will be with us for years to come, whatever the outcome of the election in November. Something to consider.
posted by Loudmax at 8:48 AM on June 3, 2004

C_D : heh. It took me a second.
posted by bshort at 8:54 AM on June 3, 2004

don't protect the establishment - be humble, be truthful - and share what needs to be shared about 9-11, WMD, Valerie Plame, Chalabi, and all the bs.

Or, in plain English: "Give us lefties all the dirt you have on Bush and fast! Hold nothing back. Come on, come on! Dish it out, we have an election to win!"


Loudmax: Every president can select their own CIA director. Bush was one of the first to keep on selected by a previous president. If Bush reappoints someone, and if Kerry wins (hahahahaha!!!) the guy will likely not keep his job.
posted by MrAnonymous at 8:59 AM on June 3, 2004

I totally can't wait for the 60 Minutes interview.
posted by VulcanMike at 9:01 AM on June 3, 2004

MrAnonymous, thanks for the correction.

Sigh of relief.
posted by Loudmax at 9:03 AM on June 3, 2004

loudmax: ewww. hadn't thought of that.....
posted by Tryptophan-5ht at 9:03 AM on June 3, 2004

and if Kerry wins (hahahahaha!!!)

Well, current polling as well as every known historical indicator re: approval rating indicate that he will win. But Matt Drudge says he's a flip-flop-fornicator, so I guess you never know.
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 9:06 AM on June 3, 2004

I don't have anything to add--other than a vague feeling of unease, but that's nothing new--however I did want the chance to type flip-flop-fornicator in a public forum. Ahhhh...it's as mellifluous to type as it is to say. Thought so.
posted by WolfDaddy at 9:13 AM on June 3, 2004

Another ex-CIA/ex-KGB director to end up with a bullet to the head?

Perhaps a purge?

Maybe the proverbial fan that the shit will hit?

[/Now taking off tinfoil hat]

The only real question is "how personal?"
posted by nofundy at 9:21 AM on June 3, 2004

Give us lefties all the dirt you have on Bush and fast!

you are suggesting he should bury any important information he may have about pre-911 lapses in security to save the bush and his buddies ass? or clintons reputation?

--- tell it to the families of those who died

are you also suggesting he should bury potential pre-war lies/hype to the congress and american people stovepiped by chalabi or the neo-cons? again to protect bush, cheney, rummy or in fact joe biden?

---- tell it to the soldiers maimed for life, or the families of the thousands of civilians killed in iraq.

sheesh. you guys.
posted by specialk420 at 9:21 AM on June 3, 2004

--- tell it to the families of those who died

---- tell it to the soldiers maimed for life, or the families of the thousands of civilians killed in iraq.

Today's NewsFilter thread is brought to you by Emotional Appeal.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 9:35 AM on June 3, 2004

Wouldn't it be a trip if it turned out that Tenet just listened when his friend, Al Gore, said he should resign, and then decided that he was right?
posted by lodurr at 9:38 AM on June 3, 2004

specialk420 won't have any posts left if you keep doing that, DA.
posted by darukaru at 9:41 AM on June 3, 2004

Bush is getting a lawyer over the Plame affair and now Tenet resigns? Things don't seem so rosey for Bush and the GOP anymore.

Can't wait to see who's next. Perhaps we should start a dead-pool.

>Today's NewsFilter thread is brought to you by Emotional Appeal.

Hehe.
posted by skallas at 9:55 AM on June 3, 2004

In this list of CIA directors & deputy's, some - like Tenet - are described as 'Honorable', some - like John E. McLaughlin & John F. Blake - are not. What does the distinction mean?
posted by dash_slot- at 9:58 AM on June 3, 2004

Today's NewsFilter thread is brought to you by Emotional Appeal.

darukaru and devils advocate volunteer to hold mr. anonymous's hand when he's explaining to those effected by this governments mistakes and lies, why more secrecy to protect people
s political careers is more important than answers and openess. what a nice little field trip for you kids.
posted by specialk420 at 10:01 AM on June 3, 2004

some - like Tenet - are described as 'Honorable'

Despite the hint of rich veins of irony lurking just below the surface, I'm afraid the truth is quite mundane.

Look again at the list, and I believe you will find that for most cases where "the Honorable" precedes the name, the D.D. had also served as DOI, or in some other Cabinet level post -- thus earning the title "Honorable". (Maybe there's a vein of irony in there after all...)
posted by lodurr at 10:12 AM on June 3, 2004

specialk420: I was not implying that at all.

some - like Tenet - are described as 'Honorable', some...are not. What does the distinction mean?

It's an official title granted to people of certain rank in government. Tenet is high enough that he gets the title. Those who served as director or acting director of the CIA got the title. If the highest they ever got was deputy director (and not acting director) they don't get the title. Note that John Blake was only acting deputy director and John McLaughlin is only deputy director. After Tenet resigns, McLaughlin will have the title, as he will be acting director.
posted by MrAnonymous at 10:19 AM on June 3, 2004

One down, [a few] to go...
posted by rushmc at 10:23 AM on June 3, 2004

I was not implying that at all.

i wasn't implying that tenet should tell what he knows for political gain for the dems... rather for the good of the country. what were you implying - while snidely making assumptions about my post?
posted by specialk420 at 10:31 AM on June 3, 2004

Doesn't quite add up to me - John E. McLaughlin has been Deputy since 2000. Thats longer than the Honorable Richard J. Kerr (Deputy Director of Central Intelligence, 20 March 1989 — 2 March 1992) never made it to Director.

See what I mean? I thought you guys were oposed to honorifics, anyway?
posted by dash_slot- at 10:38 AM on June 3, 2004

Call me shallow. . .but I loved her take on it, accurate or not.
posted by Danf at 10:41 AM on June 3, 2004

George Tenet is the -- is the kind of public service you like -- servant you like to work with. He's strong. He's resolute. He served his nation as the director for seven years. He has been a strong and able leader at the agency. He's been a -- he's been a strong leader in the war on terror. And I will miss him. I send my blessings to George and his family. I look forward to working with him until the time he leaves the agency. And I wish him all the very best. (From the President's official Statement, whitehouse.gov)

I wonder if he's a strong leader?

You would think the White House web communications staff would go to great lengths to clean up presidential statements before making them available to the world.
posted by mhaw at 10:58 AM on June 3, 2004

Nice one, Civil_Disobedient... :-D
posted by wfrgms at 11:04 AM on June 3, 2004

"I'm very surprised. I certainly thought that the president was not going to acknowledge that there were problems in his own inner circle. I certainly thought that Tenet, being a very loyal-type of civil servant, would not walk out on the president in the middle of an election campaign. I think the president feels he's in enough trouble that he's got to begin to cast some of the blame for the morass that we are in in Iraq on to somebody else and this was one subtle way to do it." - Former CIA Director Stansfield Turner, reacting to Tenet's resignation.

Hmmm. Tenet is Clinton holdover. Senate intelligence commitees reportedly about to bash CIA and Bush administration for relying upon and/or inventing pre-war intelligence. Bush floundering in polls. Bush consults with a lawyer on his administration's criminal outing of a CIA agent.

Tenet falls on sword.

Any surprises at all here?

As Cheney becomes more and more a liability as election looms, watch for increasing concerns about his cardiac history.

Today's NewsFilter thread is brought to you by Emotional Appeal.

'Course, to some idiots, "emotional appeals" should only be used to getting us INTO wars, with outright, partisan lies about "yellowcake", WMDs, unilateral torture, "terrorist harbors", and the like.

Like the man said, tell it to the families of the dead. Tell THEM we really shouldn't look into the miserable lies that got us into this quagmire.

Then be prepared for them to spit fully and directly into your face.

specialk420 won't have any posts left if you keep doing that, DA.

Yep, he/she will. But of course, darukaru, as usual, is the one who can't even muster a post on the topic. Sad, although unsurprising.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 11:20 AM on June 3, 2004

/also awaits dhoyt's unhypocritical snarking at today's Bush speech thread, which was also so awfully obscure and hard to find in the news.....
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 11:23 AM on June 3, 2004

Personal reasons, huh? Maybe George is the "high-level Bush appointee" who was paying the Washingtonienne for anal?
posted by zoogleplex at 11:28 AM on June 3, 2004

~chuckle~
posted by matteo at 11:46 AM on June 3, 2004

Bush Knew About Leak of CIA Operative's Name
posted by homunculus at 1:12 PM on June 3, 2004

He is a good man, and will be sorely missed by his employees. When he first accepted the job, he made a commitment to stabilize the agency ... which was in almost complete disarray. It had had three of four directors in as many years, and was getting beaten up by political correctness. Nearly a third of its most experienced field people had quit in disgust (and these aren't the sort of folks that can be easily, or quickly, replaced). GT made the commitment, and kept it. He did stabilze the agency. He didn't quit when people beat the shit out of him publically (and the CIA director is second only to Greenspan in the public beatings he's required to take). He defended his employees fiercely, and to the best of his ability, rebuilt the CIA.

He was also nearly apolitical. Very few people, in that sensitive of a position, would have been kept on by one party after having been appointed by the other ... but Bush understands the CIA (his father having run it), and understood full well what GT accomplished. But that job takes a pretty nasty toll on a person. Your successes - even major ones that save thousands of lives - are never made public, while every failure is blasted all over the place for the world to see, and many things that aren't your failure are still blamed on you.

GT stayed on under Bush to maintain stability in the transition, but was reportadly already thinking about exiting when 9/11 happened. Once that happened, he had to stay on, because throwing the agency into further upheaval at that time would have been a terrible idea. But I'll bet he's feeling little other than enormous relief at finally being able to let go of the job.

And he's a gentleman, not a slimeball. He's not going to write tell-all books glorifying himself and trashing the Presidents he worked for (Bush or Clinton).

MeFi is probably the wrong place for the sentiment - but I'm sad to see him go, and am greatly appreciative of his long service in a job that is nearly impossible for anyone to do well.
posted by MidasMulligan at 1:26 PM on June 3, 2004

I agree with Midas. A lot of people seem to criticize Tenet without understanding the complexities of the job. While he does have a lot of discretion in what goes on behind the scenes, he has very little when it comes to public events.
posted by chaz at 1:34 PM on June 3, 2004

Reading your eloquent comments, Midas, it gets me to thinking... (ow it hurts)...

If Tenet is a man of this caliber, which I'll accept at face value, then I have to go with my thought that the political derailment of the intelligence process by the Bush Administration, rather than any incompetence or lack of control of the CIA organization by Tenet, is responsible for both the 9/11 tragedy and the Iraq debacle.

Thus pointing the finger right back where, IMO, it darn well ought to be pointed.

Too bad Tenet, if he is indeed this capable, apolitical, effective public servant, becomes The Fall Guy. (I got it too, CD :) ) Or at least, *A* fall guy... I'm sure there will be more.
posted by zoogleplex at 2:02 PM on June 3, 2004

There will be...many more--i'm betting Cheney is next.
posted by amberglow at 2:06 PM on June 3, 2004

go peacefully to those 100,000K speeches george. Hey 7 years is a long run and he deserves some hard cash and time off to spend with the family.
posted by clavdivs at 2:32 PM on June 3, 2004

There was a lot of hope (and doubt) centered around bringing in Tenet, a relative outsider, to clean up the agency. By most accounts, his tenure has been a disappointment, so I have to think MM's accolades are misplaced.
posted by rushmc at 3:10 PM on June 3, 2004

...former CIA Director Richard Helms was so frustrated by his lack of real authority within the intelligence community that he concluded, "It was unrealistic for any DCI to think that he could have a significant influence on US intelligence-resource decisions or the shaping of the intelligence community." ...Helms once observed to his staff that, "while he, as DCI, was theoretically responsible for 100% of the nation's intelligence activities, he in fact controlled less than 15% of the community's assets - and most of the other 85% belonged to the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff." - Puzzle Palace, Bamford p17
posted by roboto at 3:11 PM on June 3, 2004

There will be...many more

Should Rumsfeld resign?
posted by homunculus at 3:18 PM on June 3, 2004

Midas, I agree with you. I don't think the CIA "dropped the ball" or screwed up in any way (no sarcasm this time). In fact, what really burns me up is Tenet's fierce loyalty to the administration, when he should have said, "I told them what we knew, they just wouldn't listen." But he didn't. Instead he's been playing this mea-culpa game, which is so transparent as to be laughable.

GW: "Uh, it was the CIA's fault."
GT: "Der, yep, it suuure was. Yessiree, it was all our fault, not nobody else's."

A lot of good, talented operatives and analysists got the shit end of the stick for all their hard work.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 3:19 PM on June 3, 2004

If Tenet is a man of this caliber, which I'll accept at face value, then I have to go with my thought that the political derailment of the intelligence process by the Bush Administration, rather than any incompetence or lack of control of the CIA organization by Tenet, is responsible for both the 9/11 tragedy and the Iraq debacle.

Thus pointing the finger right back where, IMO, it darn well ought to be pointed.

Where the finger should be pointed is at the fucking terrotrists.

Too bad Tenet, if he is indeed this capable, apolitical, effective public servant, becomes The Fall Guy. (I got it too, CD :) ) Or at least, *A* fall guy... I'm sure there will be more.

The reason that there has to be "fall guys" is precisely because of comments like the one above ("where the finger should be pointed"). The process of intelligence gathering and analysis is almost unbelievably complex, and evolves on almost a daily basis. It is never perfect. It will never be perfect.

It is a harsh truth, but there will be more terrorist attacks in the US - and nobody - nobody - will be able to stop them. We are a huge country, with open borders, with immigrants from almost every other nation on earth. The people to blame will be the fucking terrorists.

I'm a bit sensitive about this. I very nearly died on 9/11, my firm does work with financial services filtering software that tries to stop money laundering, and I work with, and personally know, various people in the intelligence community. If you want to point a finger at a President, point it at Clinton - with no hesitation. He turned service in the intelligence agencies into a nightmare. A lot of the people that were the best we had ... who were willing to do incredibly dangerous work for years for little pay and no recognition ... left because of what they perceived as something close to attacks on their agencies by the Clinton gang. (The fact that Jamie Gorelick is actually on the 9/11 Commission is viewed as something close to bizarre by people that do intelligence for a living ...). Clinton tied their hands in several large ways, and a thousand small ways. He decimated the culture. 9/11 was planned, and some of the terrorists already in the country, before Bush even took office.

A telling sign of Clinton's disdain is that fact that he met with GT all of three or four times (and he appointed him) - as opposed to Bush, who meets with GT daily.

But with all of that said, I still do not blame Clinton, or Bush, or GT, or Louie Freeh (who was one of the worst FBI Directors since the agency was formed). I blame the fucking terrorists.

And I think the best thing for our security as a country is not to look for fall guys, or engage in self-flagellation - but rather to honestly address any problems that come to light in an examination of what happened, learn as many lessons as can be learned, and try to figure out how to balance the need to remain an open society with the need to secure ourselves from those who plot daily to use that very openness to kill us. This is a virtually insoluble problem. We can - and do - stop a good number of attacks. But no President, no CIA or FBI Director, will be able to stop them all.

You can plan for, and try to stop 500 different scenerios, but the 501st will succeed. Doesn't mean we should not try to stop all terrorist activity, but it does mean that when you prevent 500 attacks, and the 501st succeeds, the blame should not be placed on a President, or a CIA Director ... it should be placed on the fucking terrorists.
posted by MidasMulligan at 3:55 PM on June 3, 2004

You know, this is the first time in my memory that you've actually ascribed responsibility to someone for the adminstration's multiple failings, Midas--and it's Clinton?!?

too funny. Is Clinton also responsible for the invasion and mess in Iraq, and the Plame affair, and the non-capture of Osama, and the millions of lost jobs, and the massive deficit, and the unwise tax cuts, and...?
posted by amberglow at 4:06 PM on June 3, 2004

Voluminous writing enclosing the same talking points. Blame Clinton? Clinton's anti-terrorism strategy actually managed to _stop_ a few terrorist attacks, like the millenium bomb plot.

All I can say is, I hope Tenet is a fast writer, because I can't wait to hear what he has to say. I wonder if the Bush people knew what they were getting themselves into trying to pin it all on Tenet. Outing Chalabi as an Iranian double agent is probably just the tip of the iceberg that Tenet can bring out on these liars.
posted by Space Coyote at 4:17 PM on June 3, 2004

Midas - I think the blame pointing referenced is with respect to the weapons of mass destruction that led Bush and Company to believe we had to go into Iraq to protect ourselves. Some people up thread could be talking about a failure with respect to terrorism, but it's been my experience that most who post on MeFi realize they aren't even close to being the same things.

It's easy to see how you might have conflated the two things though. Even Bush seems to be confused about it.
posted by willnot at 4:25 PM on June 3, 2004

Sorry - I see now that the text you quoted did mention 9-11.
posted by willnot at 4:28 PM on June 3, 2004

the blame should not be placed on a President, or a CIA Director ... it should be placed on the fucking terrorists.

You mean it shouldn't rest with the wingnut Jesus-fetishist dipshit faux-good ol' boy President-semi-elect who is too busy whipping up the terrorist frenzy and adding to their ranks with his ill-advised warmaking to address the real threat, and with the people who feed him his lines and his policies? Nuh-uh, stav : he's strong and good, and he believes in liberty and freedom! We shouldn't criticize him in times of war! Why that'd just be...self-flagellation!

Forget the flails. He should be taken out back, dragged by the scruff of the neck into a corner, and put down like a rabid dog. His incompetence and that of his administration killed all those people in 2001 (and many thousands since), just as much as the competence of the jihadis did.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:43 PM on June 3, 2004

Oh I definitely blame the terrorists in the case of 9/11, and share your obvious anger at them, Midas. But so much has come out since that attack saying that the intel community was pretty certain that a major attack was imminent and that information reflecting that certainty was passed along up the appropriate channels, that it's hard to ONLY blame the terrorists - even given that inter-agency miscommunication caused the reports to not receive enough emphasis to the appropriate people. I think there's blame to throw around at all levels.

Of course, if the terrorists weren't constantly trying to commit acts of terrorism, this would be moot; however, given that we KNOW (and actually knew previous to 9/11, ref. the first WTC truck bomb in the parking lot) that there WILL be attempted acts of terrorism going on, I think it's safe to put some blame on the system and both the Clinton and Bush administrations for missing the clues to 9/11.

The Iraq debacle I throw squarely on the Bush boys, though. No wiggle room there.
posted by zoogleplex at 5:11 PM on June 3, 2004

Midas, you are a freakin' genius. I'll be your Yes Man and say "Amen" to your comments.
posted by MrAnonymous at 5:11 PM on June 3, 2004

:::reads MidasMulligan's comment, shakes head sadly and makes whooshing-airplane gesture over his head:::
posted by rushmc at 5:17 PM on June 3, 2004

The process of intelligence gathering and analysis is almost unbelievably complex, and evolves on almost a daily basis. It is never perfect. It will never be perfect.

Except for those rare "slam dunk" occasions.
posted by eddydamascene at 5:37 PM on June 3, 2004

Thanks, Midas. You're the only one in this thread that makes any sense, and don't let the peanut gallery get you down.
posted by David Dark at 5:51 PM on June 3, 2004

Touche, eddy.

Tenet became emotional, choking back tears. He said his son, John Michael, is going to be a high school senior next year, "and I'm going to be a senior with him. . . ." Then he drew laughter when he said: "I'm going to learn how to instant-message all of his friends. That would be an achievement!"

I remember when I was a high school senior, how I begged my father so in hopes that he would resign so we could spend more time together. Yeah, right.
posted by planetkyoto at 6:13 PM on June 3, 2004

Interesting perspective on MeFi. Fixate on the eight months prior to 9/11, and ignore the 8 years prior to it ... during which most of the planning happened, and during which policy after policy was implemented that made it far more difficult for our intelligence agencies to discover that planning.

But I can understand how y'all want to try to comletely exclude that from the discussion. Bush=Evil appears to be more like a religion.

Of course, if the terrorists weren't constantly trying to commit acts of terrorism, this would be moot; however, given that we KNOW (and actually knew previous to 9/11, ref. the first WTC truck bomb in the parking lot) that there WILL be attempted acts of terrorism going on, I think it's safe to put some blame on the system and both the Clinton and Bush administrations for missing the clues to 9/11.

What I was actually trying to say was that - from the perspective of the intelligence community itself - it is not nearly as simple as this. The difficulty is that politics is a binary world (a President either does something, or doesn't), while intelligence is always a matter of partial truths, and probabilities. The best intelligence generally comes from the shadiest characters - who always have ulterior motives, may or may not be believable, and nearly always tell part of the truth, but not the entire truth.

Furthermore, in retrospect - after an event has happened - it is always easy to pick and choose isolated bits of intelligence that, if you knew what you were looking for, would have indicated that the attack was immanent ... because the attack itself is (in essence), a pattern that can be used to filter data through. But trying to isolate those same couple of dozen individual pieces of disconnected information (out of hundreds of millions of discrete bits of information that pass through our intelligence community every year) before you know the pattern that connects them is not easy, and claiming someone is to "blame" for not finding them is not helpful.

Yes, you can find evidence that there were hints of airline hijackings. Mixed in with thousands of other hints about everything from dirty bombs to biological weapons attacks. But even solid information that hijacking might be used is not enough to act on ... and to date, despite the highly partisan 9/11 Commission, no one has found any data indicating that anyone knew of the specifics of the 9/11 attacks.

Personally, I do not blame Clinton (what my comments above were expressing was the fact that a good number of quite seasoned intelligence folks do blame Clinton). If anyone should be held most accountable for 9/11, it would (in my opinon) be Louis Freeh. He hated computers ... and he ran the FBI throughout the tech boom ... during a period of time in which Al Qaeda was adopting fairly advanced technical tactics (steganography, online dead drops & etc.) - he had our FBI field agents taking notes with pads and pencils. There were 40 or 50 different systems within the FBI, none of which were integrated. On 9/11 ... the FBI's case management system was still green screen ... text only (no mouse - remember the early days of DOS?). You could search FBI intelligence for the word "flight", or "school", but you couldn't do a search for the term "flight schools". FBI agents were forbidden to Google things like "Islamic Mosques and terrorism" at work.

This is the sort of disaster Bush inherited. While he (rightly) kept GT on, he immediately started looking to replace Freeh ... but while he moved quickly, Mueller didn't actually take the helm of the FBI until a week before 9/11. Gotta remember that the US Federal Government is the single largest employer on earth. It is a huge bureaucracy numbering well over a million employees (not counting the USPS), and each incoming administration changes maybe a couple of thousand people at the top ... it is not a speedboat that turns on a dime, it is a huge tanker that changes course slowly, and incrementally. It commonly takes a new President a year or more to make substantive changes (especially after the previous President was in office for 8 years).

All that aside, however, I (personally) blame Al Quaeda, and Al Qaeda alone, for 9/11. A group of fanatics have it in their heads that they want to kill us ... in as dramatic a fashion as they can. They want to destroy our civilization. Everything we consider to be the highest of our virtues ... our openess, our multiple religions and beliefs, our style and quality of life, our standard of living, our agressive (in their view) women ... are the very things that they believe justify our destruction. And these people are willing to use themselves in suicide attacks to accomplish their goals. There is not an easy and obvious solution to this. We'll stop 500 attacks, and miss the 501st.

Anyone that wants to reduce the issue to cheap partisan attacks for the sake of an individual election is either blind to reality, or is aware of the reality and doesn't care. Further attacks will happen - whether Bush is re-elected or not. This situation is a major clash of cultures, and is likely to take a decade (at the very least) to resolve. (The Cold War lasted 40 years, and only ended when enough of the Soviet population itself decided it had had enough ... ).

The thing I find the saddest is that as the election approaches, most of America has become intent on blaming other Americans for the attacks. Fall guys and scapegoats must be found! Heads must roll! This is all not only sickening, but if anything, damages our collectives efforts to address and resolve the actual issues.

But at the end of the day ... there are still (thankfully) people in the trenches that will, today, risk their lives to try to get sensitive information about upcoming attacks. They'll walk down dark alleys, and meet with armed men that may or may not give them information, that may or may not be true (or they may be leading them into a trap). The 500 attacks that will be stopped - that none of us will never know about - will be stopped because these men and women are doing their jobs right now.

George Tenet did his utter best for these people ... despite the fact that both they, and he, usually get little other than criticism in the public press. To his credit, whenever possible, he tried to take the full burden of the public criticism on himself, and shield his employees from having to withstand the pain of their own country's derision at the same time as they take unimaginable personal risks for the sake of that country. I believe he is both loved and respected by his people - and did a job better than almost anyone else could have done ... given the enormous constraints that were placed on him.

The 9/11 that did happen was horrific - and hurt everyone in the intelligence community badly (these folks took it personally). But for the many 9/11's that were prevented, I bow to you George. Deeply, and from the waist.
posted by MidasMulligan at 7:45 PM on June 3, 2004

And that has to do with attacking Iraq how?
Al Quaeda was not in Iraq before.
Many of the posters here are talking about the failures that lead to Iraq.
posted by Iax at 8:31 PM on June 3, 2004

Nuh-uh, stav : he's strong and good, and he believes in liberty and freedom! We shouldn't criticize him in times of war! Why that'd just be...self-flagellation!

HAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHAH
HAhahaha...ha
posted by clavdivs at 8:50 PM on June 3, 2004

But for the many 9/11's that were prevented, I bow to you George. Deeply, and from the waist.

oh christ. you were so excited to receive your sea monkeys
when you were a kid weren't you midas?

what subsequent 9.11s have been prevented? the big dirty bombing plot being developed by the terrorist mastermind jose padilla? or the lackawanna gang?

lets see how much love you have for tenet you have in 6 months when he's dropped the dime on your boys rummy, libby, feith, and cheney.
posted by specialk420 at 8:52 PM on June 3, 2004

Tenet said that, in a perfect world, the CIA would never again miss an event that changes the course of history.

"I hope I could say that it'll never again occur," he said. "But given the problems we face in the world, and given the kind of resources and commitments we have around the world, U.S. intelligence is stretched and we have to do the best we can."
-George Tenet June 2, 1998

I didn't know that Rotten had this kind of thing but here's a great short Tenet bio.
posted by euphorb at 9:36 PM on June 3, 2004

DD:You're the only one in this thread that makes any sense, and don't let the peanut gallery get you down.

Hahah, I love the "me too!" posts from the usual suspects. Do you guys group hug too?

"Oh those mefi meanies! Hold me, Midas!"
posted by skallas at 9:37 PM on June 3, 2004

Fixate on the eight months prior to 9/11, and ignore the 8 years prior to it

Most of the damage of the 9/11 attacks could have been prevented by properly addressing known threats, even if the intelligence agencies failed to uncover specifics of the attack. There was precedent for hijacked plane as missile (al Qaeda linked GIA targeting the Eiffel Tower in 1994) and a very clear warning a month before the attack stating "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States" and that al Qaeda was involved in activities "consistent with preparations for hijacking."
posted by eddydamascene at 9:38 PM on June 3, 2004

There was precedent for hijacked plane

There was a joke going around after that idiot flew a plane into the White House, it goes something like this...

"oh, that is Woolsey, he is trying to get in to see Clinton"

I guess that one isn't used much anymore.

Most of the damage of the 9/11 attacks could have been prevented by properly addressing known threats, even if the intelligence agencies failed to uncover specifics of the attack.

really? does it involve x-ray eyes and mind reading or do you have a plan the rest if us did not think of....like following these guys when they entered the country, like finding out IF they INTEND harm?

One reason the plan worked was that perhaps our government was not looking for a modified Bojinka 2. Perhaps these guys were thought of as a false flag, providing cover for another group.
posted by clavdivs at 10:01 PM on June 3, 2004

does it involve x-ray eyes and mind reading or do you have a plan the rest if us did not think of

We could have intercepted the planes. It's not that we couldn't make the call (a grave decision, if ever) -- Condoleezza testified that we didn't even consider the possibility.
posted by eddydamascene at 11:02 PM on June 3, 2004

Anyone that wants to reduce the issue to cheap partisan attacks for the sake of an individual election is either blind to reality, or is aware of the reality and doesn't care.

Well, Midas, Bill Clinton was a sack of poo too. This isn't controversial.

But there's poo at which you wrinkle your nose a bit but which you resignedly wipe up and then throw the diaper in the wash, and for which your home is none the worse, and then there's a continent-drenching titanic tsunami of reeking shit that destroys everything in its path, and leaves a wake of stinking fecal devastation as far as the eye can see.

I leave the connection of the little brown dots to you.

But I will agree that my American friends are fucked either way, and so are the rest of us.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:27 PM on June 3, 2004

I love the fact that the usual bootlickers are soooo busy defending Bush when in fact, had Gore been allowed to serve by the Supreme Court, they would have been first line in the inevitable post-911 Gore-impeachment lynch mob (and now they're just squealing "blame the terrorists, or blame Clinton but don't touch our George!").

so sad.

certainly utter disregard for pre-911 intelligence (Aug 6, 2001 briefing, etc) is somehow more troubling than a few episodes of White House fellatio. but of course the Right -- master of fellatio, when it comes to All Things Bush -- needs a lot of ass-covering these days: this way if/when the US is attacked again, they'll just deflect the blame. it won't be that Bush made America (and the world) much less safe. the ratio will be: he's not up to him defending America.

after all what do Presidents/CIA directors can do about safety of their own countrymen?
the right wing's response: "nothing". unless a Democrat is in charge, of course.

reminds of the way some people try to defend Bush for 3 years of appallingly bad economy: "the president can't do anything for the economy!". I guess they'll stick to the same line of reasoning when the US economy finally gets better like it seems to be doing(certainly the body-bag industry and Halliburton are going great, thanks to Iraq attaq -- Tenet's "slam-dunk" by the way), and won't credit Bush.
intellectual honesty. heh.

again, if we weren't discussing how WWIII has begun, such hypocrisy would be totally, totally funny. now it's just pathetic. and scary
posted by matteo at 11:56 PM on June 3, 2004

Did al-Qaida trainee warn FBI before 9/11?

Says he told agents of terrorist plan to hijack passenger planes

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5131524/

By Lisa Myers, Jim Popkin and the NBC Investigative Unit
NBC News
Updated: 6:44 p.m. ET June 03, 2004

LONDON - More than a year before 9/11, a Pakistani-British man told the FBI an incredible tale: that he had been trained by bin Laden’s followers to hijack airplanes and was now in America to carry out an attack. The FBI questioned him for weeks, but then let him go home, and never followed up. Now, the former al-Qaida insider is talking.

In March, 2000, Niaz Khan said he was down and out, waiting tables in a curry house north of London, overwhelmed by gambling debts and increasingly drawn to the message of a radical local imam. The imam extolled Osama bin Laden and the rewards of dying for jihad.

Then, one night, outside a casino in Manchester, England, Khan said two mysterious men approached him. “First they say, ‘We can help you,’" recalls Khan. "I say, ‘How can you help me?’ Say, ‘OK, come sit in car.’ Said ‘Do you heard Osama name’?”

Khan, now 30, said the men told him they were working on behalf of Osama bin Laden, knew all about his background and gambling debts — information presumably gleaned from his fellow mosque members — and offered to teach him the ways of jihad.

They gave Khan several thousand dollars and flew him to Lahore, Pakistan, where he waited for instructions in a local hotel. He says that bin Laden’s followers then drove him, blindfolded, to a nearby safe house.

In training
Khan told NBC News that for the next few weeks he was trained by al-Qaida to hijack passenger planes, and then sent to the United States. But when he told the FBI, headquarters was skeptical and, after several weeks, senior FBI officials ordered him released to the custody of British intelligence. Khan said, “I told them before the 9/11, about more than year, be… hijacking in America or on America airline.”

Khan said that at the Lahore training compound he and up to 30 other men were taught hijacking basics, including how to smuggle guns and other weapons through airport security, techniques to overpower passengers and crew and how to get into a cockpit.

Khan says he did not think about all the other people he might have killed and, at the time, didn’t care. “Not that time," he said. "If I die, it doesn’t matter because this life anyway, it’s no good.”

After about a week of training, Khan said he was given money to fly a circuitous route from Pakistan to Doha, Qatar, to London, to Zurich, Switzerland, back to London, and then off to New York. The purpose, he said, was to allow him to observe flight operations and on-board security measures.

Upon landing at JFK airport, Khan says he was supposed to go to a taxi stand, find a man in a white prayer cap and use a code. “He say, ‘Your name Babu Khan?’ " said Khan. "And you will be saying, ‘Yes, my name Babu Khan.’ ‘Your name Babu Khan?’ You say, ‘Yes, my name Babu Khan.’”

But Khan claims he got cold feet. Instead of meeting his contact, he slipped away, retreated to New York, then took a bus to Atlantic City and gambled away almost all his money. Fearful that he had blown al-Qaida’s cash, and aware that his terrorist trainers had copied his passport information and easily knew how to find him, Khan turned himself in and confessed. “I’ve been to Pakistan," he said. "I know about this hijacking, something going on.”

Khan said his trainers never told him exactly what his terrorist mission in the United States would be. He said he was told he would learn more details from a half dozen other trained terrorists who, he was told, already were in the U.S.

For three weeks, FBI counter-terrorist agents in Newark, N.J. interrogated Khan, created composite drawings of his terrorist trainer and a fellow student and then wired Khan up and took him back to JFK airport, hoping to smoke out other conspirators. But they had no luck.

Lie-detector tests
Congress’ 9/11 report confirms that in April, 2000, an unnamed “walk-in” told the FBI he “was to meet five or six persons” — some of them pilots — who would take over a plane and fly to Afghanistan, or blow the plane up. The report adds that the “walk-in” passed a lie-detector test.

NBC News has learned that Khan passed not one but two FBI polygraphs. A former FBI official says Newark agents believed Khan and tried to aggressively follow every lead in the case, but word came from headquarters saying, “return him to London and forget about it” -- which, critics say, is exactly what the FBI did.

But the FBI insists it investigated Khan’s allegations thoroughly, could not confirm them, and had no legal grounds to hold him. Federal prosecutors agreed. FBI officials say they did the right thing in turning Khan over to British authorities, and assumed they would carefully investigate.

But NBC News has learned that New Scotland Yard only interviewed Khan for about two hours, and then released him. Spokesmen for Scotland Yard and MI-5, the British intelligence agency, would not comment.

Khan said he watched the 9/11 attacks on television and was horrified. He said he was sad for the victims and relieved he had not carried out any attacks of his own. To him, the 9/11 plot rang familiar. “Maybe same plan," he said. "Maybe same training.”

There’s no evidence Khan was part of the 9/11 plot. But lawyers for 9/11 families urged him to tell his story, arguing it reveals a major missed clue.

Khan says the British tabloids offered to pay him to tell his story, but he declined. He wants it known that he has not accepted any money for any interview.

He is fearful for his life and, at first, was reluctant to talk to NBC. He changed his mind after a British newspaper published his name and, he says, surreptitiously took his photograph. Once it was published, he agreed to go on camera to talk about what he sees as a missed opportunity.

Khan remains surprised that, to this day, the FBI, CIA and Scotland Yard have never asked for his help in identifying the street address of the Lahore safe house where he and dozens of other men were trained. He says he saw some identifying signs and might be able to locate it today. “I just surprised because [they] never come back to ask some more things," he said. "[The FBI] believed me, but maybe not seriously.”

Now that he’s told his story, Khan plans to go back into the shadows—branded by some a terrorist and by others a traitor to the cause.

Lisa Myers is NBC News’ Senior Investigative Correspondent
posted by SweetIceT at 11:59 PM on June 3, 2004

There's this new thing on the internet called a hyperlink, SweetIceT!

What'll they think of next, huh?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 12:04 AM on June 4, 2004

"Oh those mefi meanies! Hold me, Midas!"

I don't think Midas will hold you, skallas, but there are plenty of others around here who are totally cool with that sort of thing. You'll have no problem finding a man to hold you, curse God with you, fill each others' holes, whatever. And God knows the holes in your conspiracy theories need lots of filling up. Get busy now.

I love the fact that the usual bootlickers are soooo busy defending Bush when in fact, had Gore been allowed to serve by the Supreme Court, they would have been first line in the inevitable post-911 Gore-impeachment lynch mob (and now they're just squealing "blame the terrorists, or blame Clinton but don't touch our George!").

matteo, didn't you get y2karl's memo? I voted for Gore, not Bush. In fact, I'm an independent who has voted for a Democratic candidate in each and every Presidential election. This year will be my very first vote cast for a Republican President. So no, if Gore was President, I wouldn't be calling for his resignation, I'd be defending him against the jackals (regardless of partisanship) who refuse to acknowledge that he got dealt a shitty hand and has done a damn good job of responding to the situation, just like I'm doing now.

reminds of the way some people try to defend Bush for 3 years of appallingly bad economy

Yeah, five straight quarters of growth is appallingly bad. Sheesh.
posted by David Dark at 12:48 AM on June 4, 2004

Yeah, five straight quarters of growth is appallingly bad. Sheesh.

Sure, growth in joblessness.

Oh, you mean the "growth" measured in terms of productivity? Fantastic. So the few people allowed to keep their jobs are worked twice as hard out of fear from the axe. Most of the people I've talked to are of the opinion that the job market sucks, has sucked for a few years now, and is getting suckier every day. At least, the ones who are out of school and working for a living.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 4:56 AM on June 4, 2004

There's something called "creeping determinism"--the sense that grows on us, in retrospect, that what has happened was actually inevitable--and the chief effect of creeping determinism ... is that it turns unexpected events into expected events.

I'm struck by SweetIceT's comment to remember that in August of 2001 we all knew what an airplane hijack was, tense hours of negotiation in a corner of a minor airfield, demands, getaway cars, maybe a few dead - something we could take in our stride. Joining the dots is so much easier after the fact.
posted by grahamwell at 5:36 AM on June 4, 2004

Further attacks will happen - whether Bush is re-elected or not.

Give me 100 terrorists over 1 traitor at the presidential level any time. You are conflating multiple issues here.
posted by rushmc at 5:47 AM on June 4, 2004

I just realized something--now that Tenet has resigned, can he still be compelled to testify before any commission or investigation into any of the myriad and growing scandals? Is this a CYA move?
posted by amberglow at 6:00 AM on June 4, 2004

Yeah, five straight quarters of growth is appallingly bad.

in al queda recruiting and unrestrained assault on our environment? it sure the fuck is.
posted by specialk420 at 8:04 AM on June 4, 2004

I hope Tenet doesn't get Colby-ized.
posted by wsg at 8:47 AM on June 4, 2004

don't worry wsg, George is a good anglar. Lets take Matteo and stavs fishing. I bet they would love that.
posted by clavdivs at 9:57 AM on June 4, 2004

John Dean: The Serious Implications Of President Bush's Hiring A Personal Outside Counsel For The Valerie Plame Investigation
posted by homunculus at 12:54 PM on June 4, 2004

Sure, growth in joblessness.

Civil_Disobedient, how would you respond to this?

Employment in America continues to expand strongly and steadily, according to the May Employment Situation report released by the Labor Department this morning. Payroll employment rose by 248,000 in May, and the unemployment rate held steady at the low rate of 5.6 percent. This follows increases in payroll jobs of 346,000 in March and 353,000 in April.

In sum, the economy has added 947,000 payroll jobs over the last three months, its strongest 3-month showing since May 2000. This caps nine straight months of payroll gains, which are slowly catching up to the household survey’s earlier signs of a surge (see Chart 1).

Improvements are again broad-based, with no major sectors showing any weakness. Especially notable have been gains in manufacturing and construction. Manufacturers added 32,000 jobs in May, up 91,000 since January. And for the first time in several months, the manufacturing workweek lengthened in May. The construction sector added 37,000 jobs, capping several months of strong growth.

Service industries added 176,000 workers, with gains across all subsectors except government, which shed 27,000 workers. Once again, business services led the pack, which is to be expected in a growing, flexible economy.

Wages continued their upward trend in May, tacking on an additional 5 cents per hour. For the year, hourly earnings are up 2.2 percent so far. Total private average weekly earnings are up $9.51 for the year to date.

it sure the fuck is.

specialk420, singlehandedly keeping Mefi out of schools and libraries. Nice mouth, spk.
posted by David Dark at 2:41 PM on June 4, 2004