Couldn't have said it better myself.
Lando 
Posted on 09/26/2005 8:10:14 PM PDT by Lando Lincoln
The American public is still asking as to why the CIA failed to foresee and take counter measures against the attack on the Pentagon and the World Trade Centre? What was the FBI doing? Well, we have some of the answers: Clinton’s administration policy, which was reinforced by the thoroughly despicable Jamie Gorelick, of setting up a ‘wall’ between the CIA, the FBI and local law enforcement agencies destroyed interdepartmental cooperation.
However, this does not explain why US intelligence has failed so badly in dealing with Middle Eastern terrorists. The answer lies in Congress. To be more specific, Democratic Congressmen who went out of their way to cripple America’s intelligence agencies. In this endeavour they had the aid and encouragement of the Washington-based Institute of Policy Studies (IPS); an extreme leftwing organisation that has not only supported every communist regime that ever existed but every leftwing terrorist organisation, specially the PLO.
For years the IPS waged a successful campaign of vilification against America’s intelligence agencies, even as it was cooperating with the KGB, Castro’s DGI and other communist intelligence agencies, including East Germany’s STASI. Thanks to this treasonous campaign and its policy of exposing CIA operatives, one of whom was murdered, the CIA’s international network of contacts was badly compromised with foreign contacts cutting off communications from fear of being exposed and possibly murdered.
In 1975 the Center for National Securities Studies (CNSS) — an IPS front — produced Abuses of the Intelligence Agencies a brazen piece of disinformation which influenced the infamous Church and Pike committees that had been set up to investigate American intelligence agencies. This was no surprise considering that not only were KGB agents Wilfred Burchett and Philip Agee mainly responsible for the contents of the publication but both committees, especially the Church committee, had a significant number of sympathisers and members of the IPS on their staffs.
When Carter became president in 1977 he appointed IPS sympathisers to the White House staff who were virtually given carte blanche to dismantle the America’s intelligence structure, which is just what these America-haters did.
Without the activities of the IPS the 1974 Hughes-Ryan Act would never have come into existence. This pernicious piece of legislation crippled intelligence operations by guaranteeing they would be leaked to America’s enemies. Thus the legislation was written with the intention of sabotaging American intelligence.
There are two common threads here: a) those who took measures to cripple intelligence gathering were all Democrats; b) they were all connected by one means or another to the pro-Soviet IPS. Opposition to the Intelligence Agents Identities Protection Act consisted entirely of hardcore Democrats like Pat Schroeder, Charles Schumer and John Conyers. The Act had been designed to protect the lives of American agents by preventing anyone from revealing their identities. Needless to say, opponents of the Act are IPS supporters. Just as one would expect, the leftwing mainstream media did not bother to ask them why they were opposed to protecting American agents.
(The ineffable anti-American Conyers is a Castro sympathiser who also supported the attempted Marxist-Leninist conquest of Central America. Needless to say, he hates Bush, defended Hussein, loves the Marxist Chavez of Venezuela and supports domestic terrorists like Peltier and Mumia. )
Because of the IPS and its congressional supporters American intelligence was put in a straitjacket that denied it the power to keep track of the Islamic terrorist network that has been formed in the US. Federal agents could not without great difficulty even attend conferences that pro-terrorist speakers address!
They could not even put these pro-terrorist groups under surveillance unless they provide the Attorney General with almost irrefutable proof that a crime, say the bombing of the World Trade Centre, is going to be committed. How this evidence was to be obtained without surveillance or infiltration was never explained by the likes of Charles Schumer, Schroeder, Conyers and the other Democrats that call themselves patriots.
And who was the driving force behind this legislation? That’s right, the IPS. This is what the pro-Soviet, pro-Castro, pro-PLO Richard Barnet, one of the founders of the IPS, had to say about American intelligence: “…[it’s] a criminal enterprise which must be dismantled.”
However, this is what General George Washington said in 1777 about the need for intelligence gathering:
The necessity of procuring good intelligence is apparent & need not be further urged — all that remains for me to add is, that you keep the whole matter as Secret as possible. For upon secrecy, success depends in Most Enterprises of the Kind, and for want of it, they are generally defeated, however well planned and promising a favorable issue.
But then Washington was a patriot, unlike certain other so-called Americans, including some in Congress and the US Senate.
The situation under Clinton’s watch was no better. Under his stewardship the standard for the recruitment of foreign agents and informants was raised to a level so strict that John the Baptist wouldn’t have passed muster. This had the intended effect of crippling the accumulation of foreign assets. I say intended because what other explanation could there be for a policy that crippled foreign intelligence gathering? Moreover, people who were influenced by the IPS were recruited by the CIA, including many from the universities Middle Eastern Studies departments. These departments are notorious for being anti-Semitic and anti-Western.
Without sound intelligence the human cost of effectively dealing with terrorism is only going to rise, making the war against terrorism bloodier than it need be.
Gerard Jackson is Brookes’ economics editor
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Lando
Great read thanks.
Excellent. Short, sweet and to the point. Those Aussies don't pull any punches either.
Good examples that are in line with those in Anne Coulter's "Treason" and Savage's "The Enemy Within". Seems to be a pattern...
Thanks, mate!!
...and from an Aussie -- and an economist to boot...
Great read -- thanks for posting it -- it's a keeper!
We have a lot of work ahead of us if we are going to clean out this next of ANTI-AMERICAN congressional people - in the House and the Senate.
But .. never fear .. WE ARE UP TO THE CHALLENGE!!
Which pieces of the legislation referred to is still operative?
Great article. Thanks for posting. More evidence of the enemy within.
m
btt
Damn right we're up to it. We're not naive like in the 60s when people actually thought that maybe those protestors were idealistic youth. The idealistic youth were in Viet Nam FIGHTING. These ENENIES DOMESTIC and their FOREIGN BACKERS and HANDLERS have got another thing coming. They want civil war--I say BRING IT ON PUNKS!!!!
This guy kicks butt and takes names!
Too bad this article will never appear in an American outlet (except FR, of course)
We wondered what happened to him after The New Australian disappeared.
Bump!
The CIA opposed the Iraq was on the grounds that we'd all get gassed. You can't get more wrong than that.
Every regime targeting attempt with all the fanfare during the active phase of the war turned out to be a complete crock. The CIA paid all its supposed internal Iraqi informants for lies that probably got us to kill civilians.
We had zero in the way of coup options in Iraq. We have zero in the way of coup options in North Korea. We have zero in the way of coup options in Iran. In Iran, revolution is the best possible outcome, and the CIA doesn't know word one about any of it. Chavez is making trouble and his was clearly amateur hour.
We don't know how close Iran is to nuclear weapons, and nobody on earth would believe anything we said about it even if we did know.
The CIA did not detect Dr. Khan's nuclear bazaar, as it brazenly operated from the soil of a US ally they worked with on the Afghan war, over decades. They were surprised at how far the Libyans were. They had no advanced warning of the Pakistani and India nuke test flurry.
A high school drop-out from California got to Bin Laden's inner circle within 2 years of signing up for Jihad. The CIA has a budget of billions, all national intel, its pick of brains, and hasn't got a single man inside AQ in over a decade of trying. That is, if it is trying.
We don't know where Bin Laden is. We don't know where Zawahiri is. Multi-million bounties for years and all national intel, yields squat.
We found out about the oil for food corruption of the UN and scores of Iraqi agents and paid operatives, from Iraqi files in Baghdad, not the CIA. We have yet to get the slightest further substantiation of said corruption from CIA sources. The president of France, Russian parliament members, British labor MPs, were all on the Iraqi payroll and the CIA told us nothing.
To this day we do not know the extent and nature of Russian and Chinese involvement with and encouragement of our WOT enemies on the one hand, and proliferation threats on the other. We see them flak for the latter diplomatically, we see them sell them arms, we see nuclear technology and dual use equipment being sent to them. But we get no direct info from the originating side.
The CIA have opposed the president, sought to undermine his policies, played games with domestic politicians and with reporters, verbally attacked US allies and smeared pro-US Iraqi democrats. They tried to support Baathists in Iraq, who are blowing our men up daily, and to undermine Sistani, who has worked with us to establish a moderate constitutional democracy.
They are as dumb as a bag of rocks and more loyal to the previous administration than to their own country. They couldn't find their backside with both hands. They recruit morons strained through ridiculous screening procedures that make a fetish of 50 year old pseudo-science, but can't translate Arabic documents or add three facts together. And this is not the fault of congress. Blaming 30 year old screw ups by somebody else will not get rid of last year's, by these clowns.
To start with we should want heads, and after that we should want performance.
*************************************
Since midsummer, the Senate Intelligence Committee has been attempting to solve the biggest mystery of the Iraq war: the disparity between the Bush Administration’s prewar assessment of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and what has actually been discovered.
The committee is concentrating on the last ten years’ worth of reports by the C.I.A. Preliminary findings, one intelligence official told me, are disquieting. “The intelligence community made all kinds of errors and handled things sloppily,” he said. The problems range from a lack of quality control to different agencies’ reporting contradictory assessments at the same time. One finding, the official went on, was that the intelligence reports about Iraq provided by the United Nations inspection teams and the International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitored Iraq’s nuclear-weapons programs, were far more accurate than the C.I.A. estimates. “Some of the old-timers in the community are appalled by how bad the analysis was,” the official said. “If you look at them side by side, C.I.A. versus United Nations, the U.N. agencies come out ahead across the board.”
There were, of course, good reasons to worry about Saddam Hussein’s possession of W.M.D.s. He had manufactured and used chemical weapons in the past, and had experimented with biological weapons; before the first Gulf War, he maintained a multibillion-dollar nuclear-weapons program. In addition, there were widespread doubts about the efficacy of the U.N. inspection teams, whose operations in Iraq were repeatedly challenged and disrupted by Saddam Hussein. Iraq was thought to have manufactured at least six thousand more chemical weapons than the U.N. could account for. And yet, as some former U.N. inspectors often predicted, the tons of chemical and biological weapons that the American public was led to expect have thus far proved illusory. As long as that remains the case, one question will be asked more and more insistently: How did the American intelligence community get it so wrong?
Part of the answer lies in decisions made early in the Bush Administration, before the events of September 11, 2001. In interviews with present and former intelligence officials, I was told that some senior Administration people, soon after coming to power, had bypassed the government’s customary procedures for vetting intelligence.
Should have indicated the above was the beginning of a long article and ....was an excerpt.....sorry!
good un!
great rant.
Coulter: N.Y. Times Committed 'Treason'
Phil Brennan, NewsMax
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Ann Coulter once said that her " only regret with [Oklahoma City bomber] Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building."
Her acid comments about America's most influential newspaper no doubt found new meaning in the wake of the Times' decision to disclose top-secret programs the U.S. government is using to capture terrorists.
"Thanks to The New York Times, the easiest job in the world right now is: 'Head of Counterintelligence -- Al-Qaida.'" Coulter wrote Wednesday in her syndicated column. "You just have to read the New York Times over morning coffee, and you're done by 10 a.m." [Editor's Note: You can get Ann Coulter's bestselling "Godless" for just $4.99 - Go Here Now.]
Coulter was writing about what she called "the latest of a long list of formerly top-secret government antiterrorism operations that have been revealed by the Times," noting that "last week the paper printed the details of a government program tracking terrorists' financial transactions that has already led to the capture of major terrorists and their handmaidens in the U.S."
To Coulter, a lawyer, that amounted to nothing less than treason, and she wants the newspaper punished for betraying a vital antiterrorism operation meant to prevent future 9/11s.
"Maybe treason ended during the Vietnam War when Jane Fonda sat laughing and clapping on a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun used to shoot down American pilots," Ann recalled. "She came home and resumed her work as a big movie star without the slightest fear of facing any sort of legal sanction.
"Fast forward to today, when New York Times publisher 'Pinch' Sulzberger has just been named al-Qaida's 'Employee of the Month' for the 12th straight month.
Observing that prior to the Vietnam War, "this country took treason seriously," she charged that Americans are now being told that newspapers have a right to commit treason because of "freedom of the press."
Liberals, she wrote, invoke 'freedom of the press' like some talismanic formulation that requires us all to fall prostrate in religious ecstasy. On liberals' theory of the First Amendment, the safest place for Osama bin Laden isn't in Afghanistan or Pakistan; it's in the New York Times building."
Freedom of them press, she explained "does not mean the government cannot prosecute reporters and editors for treason -- or for any other crime. The First Amendment does not mean Times editor Bill Keller could kidnap a child and issue his ransom demands from the New York Times editorial page. He could not order a contract killing on the op-ed page. Nor can he take out a contract killing on Americans with a Page One story on a secret government program being used to track terrorists who are trying to kill Americans ...
"The federal statute on treason, 18 USC 2381, provides in relevant part: 'Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States ... adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000.'"
Citing the cases of at Ezra Pound, Mildred Gillars ("Axis Sally") and Iva Toguri D'Aquino ("Tokyo Rose") who were all charged with treason for radio broadcasts intended to demoralize the troops during World War II, Coulter wrote that the first two were were severely punished and Pound committed to a mental hospital.
"There was no evidence that in any of these cases the treasonable broadcasts ever put a single American life in danger. The law on treason doesn't require it," she wrote.
Editor's Note: You can get Ann Coulter's "Godless" for just $4.99 - Go Here Now.
Editor's note:
Get your Web site listed on NewsMax.com – reach millions for pennies! Click Here Now! Sector Investing beats the S&P every time – Read More Here! Doctor Warns: Vaccines Are Dangerous – Go Here Now
Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
111-111-101
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.