Posted on 02/04/2010 6:17:48 AM PST by Shellybenoit
Michael Leiter the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, told the Senate Homeland Security Committee that the United States sometimes chooses to allow people into the country who are on the federal government’s Terrorist Watchlist. We choose to allow them in, terrorists... on purpose.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Me.), the ranking minority member of the committee, said at the same Jan. 20 hearing that the government should suspend the U.S. visas of anyone whose name appears in its master database of all people with suspected connections to terrorism and then put the burden on them to prove “they do not intend to harm this nation or its citizens.”
In that same hearing Leiter said he did not know exactly how many people on the Terrorist Watchlist entered the United States in 2009 but that it was probably a “very significant number.” He than added that “when people come to the country, if they are on the watch list, it is because we have generally made the choice that we want them here in the country for some reason or another.”
The government of the United States is using its citizens as a target to lure bad guys to our shores? There is something very wrong with that.
(Excerpt) Read more at yidwithlid.blogspot.com ...
And the news here is what...?
Yet again, the Feds demonstrate their boundless idiocy.
Oklahoma city.
"You can trust us ... we know what we're doing." /sarc
Oh, so this administration is one of those experiments, huh.
Since it’s pretty damn clear we’re going to see a major terror attack soon, and we have a regime aiding and abetting such, I can only hope the targeted population center is some extreme liberal bastion. THEY asked for this; THEY put 0bama in the White House; thus THEY need to be the ones to take it for the team.
Terrorists are welcomed with open arms into the country while an 8 year old boy can’t get off the No Fly list.
Effective counterintelligence requires that you keep the target unaware or uncertain of surveillance measures for as long as possible. If the person or persons of interest are not considered to be immediate threat(s), many times you need to let them go about their business. The more important question is how the data obtained from observation is being employed as actionable intelligence, and used to identify, classify, track and terminate threats to our security.
And if they screw up and people die, cover it up and rely on idiots who believe the government is out to get them to discredit any questions.
A competent counter terrorism unit would allow them in to get access to them. Once we have access, we can take them out.
In my estimation, it’s not field personnel who screw up: it’s the desk jockeys who prize their pet theories so much that they experience cognitive dissonance (or simple denial) whenever presented with data that contradicts their preconceptions. It’s also senior analysts who are afraid of being wrong even once for fear of short-circuiting their careers. Both issues are artifacts of an intelligence culture in which political sensitivity trumps the need to discover truth and provide actionable guidance in defense of the national interest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.