The frustration with the federal government, now characteristic of partisanship rooted in the pursuit of power, not the depth of beliefs or principles, is at levels marking permanent erosion of trust and credibility.
There was recently a sigh of relief and applause directed toward a joint intelligence operation that prevented another "underwear bomber" with new technology that would have been difficult to detect with current search and security measures at airports.
Unfortunately, due to politics overshadowing security, there have been leaks about the roles of the U.S., British and Saudi intelligence communities and the depth to which a terrorist cell was penetrated to access the technology of these murderers and to stop an attempt to destroy human life for the cause of evil.
Plans were under way to execute a terrorist event near the one-year anniversary of Osama bin Laden's death by al-Qaida of Yemen in the Arabian Peninsula.
Specific details made available to the press following the disrupted attack included the nationality of the bomber-to-be, the fact that he would don non-metallic explosives that would likely slip past security, and, unlike the unsuccessful Christmas Day underwear bomber, would have a backup detonator.
These specifics, linked with the information of a drone attack that killed a Yemini terrorist, enables the enemies of freedom to retrace and identify players, tactics and the timeline involved in this embarrassing defeat for them.
More importantly, it endangers the lives of those directly involved in fighting in the war on terror.
The U.S. partners in this operation have gone on record in expressing their shock and dismay.
In The Times, a "senior British official" described a meeting held regarding the leaks at which his peers were "slack-jawed" at the level of specifics being reported in America.
The Week reported the confirmation of such leaks by U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta in his statement:
"When these leaks take place, they damage our ability to be able to pursue intelligence efforts." Panetta also acknowledged an "internal review" and an additional criminal investigation by the FBI.
The Guardian captured the sentiments of "growing anger in the U.S. intelligence community" with agents "blaming the Obama administration for undermining national security." Their interview included the former head of the CIA's Bin Laden unit, Mike Scheur. Scheur noted "the leaking about the nuts and bolts of British involvement was despicable and would make a repeat of the operation difficult. MI6 should be as angry as hell."
He continued, "Any information disclosed is too much information. This does seem to be a tawdry political thing."
The American public, despite any partisan divide, should be livid at the rot that is permitted as standard operating policy by a White House driven by politics with disregard to our nation's security and interests.
It's time for Barack Obama and his campaign team that poses as our government leaders to exit swiftly with the reputation known for what they've created it to be: Incapable of governing.
related articles »
WASHINGTON — The deadly military-style assault on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, has raised numerous foreign policy and national ...
WASHINGTON — Airport security procedures, with their intrusive pat downs and body scans, don’t need to be toughened despite the ...
WASHINGTON — The CIA had al-Qaida fooled from the beginning.
The CIA thwarted an ambitious plot by al-Qaida's affiliate in Yemen to destroy a U.S.-bound airliner using a bomb with ...
Well you lost your chance on that when Scooter Libby was pardoned. Kind of hard to present indignation when you let that happen.
But the transparency of government is a tricky issue. Sometimes they may even let crimes happen just to track down others.
Oh wait, you,re already on record opposing that too. Maybe if they just don't let you know it's happening.
The war on terror is self-perpetuating. The more we slaughter brown skinned people with blunt force while intervening in THEIR countries, the more terrorists we create.
How can a country so powerful, yet so scared, waste so much money creating enemies then spending untold borrowed millions to chase down and kill small operators. We look to be the greater fool.
Nucanuck, we already have enemies. We don't have to go making more. They are merely emboldened and use as excuses our presence in "their" lands. By the way, they usually have no real lands. They just live in the shadows of varying nations they terrorize and intimidate. So I guess we just yawn and sit idly by as we know they are out there, they are strategizing and will implement terror plans against us. Even when they do, we just yawn and sit there, be nice to them and wonder why they aren't nice back. That will not happen. They are sworn enemies of the West in general, the US in particular. It is sad but if we are not prepared to deal with what they bring, there will be a price to pay.
L4l,
We have to ask ourselves why people hate us. It's not genetic so it must be in response to something. The US has colonized the world militarily and no one, no group likes a boot on their neck. Our model of military world governance will come to an end fairly soon because we are out of money and nearly out of credit. Better that we decide to change our model of military colonialism before it implodes, Soviet style.
What is not sustainable will end.
There does not seem to be hatred of countries that do not project power. Misdirection of power, military and economic, is at the root of human dischord, IMO.
"The American public, despite any partisan divide, should be livid at the rot that is permitted as standard operating policy by a White House driven by politics with disregard to our nation's security and interests." - editor
Hmm....that's certainly something to ponder, particularly that part about "disregard to our nation's security and interests." Let's ponder back to pre-9/11/01. As I recall there was abundant and clear evidence that there was about to be a terrorist attack of some sort, specifically of someone flying planes into the WTC. The knowledge of this was found to have made its way through the proper channels and to have reached our ever-vigilant and protective commander-in-chief. And what did he do? Oh yeah...nothing! Even when the first plane was known to have been hi-jacked and we had plenty of time for the most advanced and capable air defense system in the world to have prevented what was about to happen, what did team Bush have them do? Oh yeah....nothing! (Cheney ordered NORAD to "stand down").
Of course, one must believe the "official" version of events to accept that scenario, and most good conservatives do believe that BS story, so I'm assuming that you do, Mr. Editor. Therefore, you cannot come to any other conclusion than that Bush was responsible for the worst terrorist attack ever to take place on U.S. soil. Therefore...why don't you just cease and desist with your gibbereish about Obama being "incapable of governing," at least in matters of security? He doesn't even come close to George (asleep-at-the-wheel) Bush for being lax, willfully ignorant, or politically driven in that department.
Then, of course, there is the matter of Scooter Libby referred to by HWNB. There was the outing of Valerie Plame which was nothing if not placing politics over national security. And then there was the matter of Libby's inexcusable pardon. All politics.
Mr. Editor, your entire article is a perfect example of someone spitting into the wind. Get back to your keyboard and try to come up with something more relevant and honest for tomorrow.
Excellent points nucanuck and well stated.
Or login with:
New Account