Are the Dear Leader and his crazy train going off the paranoid deep end, are the Obamunista propagandists or is it something else?

Wolffe:White House Investigating Whether Intel Was Intentionally Withheld re:Flight 253 Bomber

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/1/4/821905/-Wolffe:White-House-Investigating-Whether-Intel-Was-Intentionally-Withheld-re:Flight-253-Bomber-Updt4

Keith Blowberman and Richard Wolffe (Obama lapdog sycophant “journalist”) of PMSNBC discuss Wolffe’s reporting that the Whitehouse is investigating whether the “failure to share information” was a deliberate act perpetrated to make the Dear Leader and his administration look weak and ineffective in protecting America. Dick “Darth Vader” Cheney and the Halliburton Hurricane/Mind Control Machine must have hypnotized Janet Napolitano and Robert Gibbs on Sunday the 27th as part of the “look weak and ineffective deception strategery”!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/ns/msnbc_tv-countdown_with_keith_olbermann#34694889

KO: Let's turn first to MSNBC political analyst Richard Wolffe, also author of "Renegade: The Making of a President." Good evening, Richard.

RW: Good evening, Keith.

KO: What is the focus here right now? Is it the push back, borders at other airports? Is it the indication that the intelligence such as what the NSA knew about Al Qaeda in Yemen using a Nigerian man for an attack was not maybe is not being utilized? Where is the focus right now?

RW: Well I was speaking to White House folks earlier today and it's clear the president is still deeply concerned and troubled even angry at the intelligence lapses but they see this more as an intelligence lapse more than as a situation of airport security faults. So the question is why didn't the centralized system of intelligence that was set up after 9/11, why didn't it work? Is it conspiracy or cock up? Is it a case of the agencies having so much rivalry between them that they were more determined to stymy each other or the centralized system rather than the terrorist threat or was it just that there were so many dots no one could connect them because it was just all too random to figure out. It seems that the president is leaning very much towards thinking this was a systemic failure by individuals who maybe had an alternative agenda.

KO: If airport security is the failsafe in that equation, what was behind the Bush adminstration's failure to establish the secondary checks overseas? Why are we suddenly rushing to this idea now? When did Mr. Bush and, I presume, Mr. Chertoff, drop that ball?

RW: Well there are more smart, more efficient ways to protect the country than to defend every airport because we know from our own airport system in this country that there are no failsafe methods, even with all the extra methods that you have out there -- people take off their shoes because of the shoe bomber, and then terrorists try and put the same explosives on another part of their body or another part of their clothing. The question here is why wasn't the intelligence directed at countries where Al Qaeda was reconstituting or establishing itself anew. That gets you to a strategic question which, unfortunately, the last administration failed to see because it was diverted, most classically, into Iraq.

KO: To your second point there, and we can sort of skip the Woody Allen joke, about how underwear will now be worn on the outside so we can check... your second point you suggested in there that the administration is looking into mixed, perhaps mixed motives, or misplaced priorities, I'm not sure exactly how you phrased that... in terms of what? Getting messages from A to B? Are people thought to have been deliberately withholding information so that the dots could not be connected?
RW: Right. The question is, was this information that was shared... remember, there was some sharing of information but it involves the father of this, in the end, terrorist, who walks in to see the CIA officials in a foreign embassy, this is an American embassy in a foreign country, and you know, that information wasn't shared fully. Why wasn't it shared fully? The question there is again, cock up or conspiracy. Was there a reason these agencies were at war with each other that prevented that intelligence from being shared?

KO: Is the implication there that there is at least a possibility that somebody understood how serious this could be and yet withheld information in order to make some other part of the counterterrorism system look bad?

RW: That has got to be an area that the White House is looking into and, you know, motives can be hard to assess because it's not clear that this person was easily identified as a terrorist. Even with the father coming forward saying they had concerns, was that more of a family concern or were there enough fingerprints here about the radicalization of this individual to suggest that it should have been taken to a different level -- at the very least a security level beyond more than a nominal sharing of information. That's where this inquiry, this internal inquiry, for the moment, has to go.

KO: Well, certainly, not to get too far ahead of what the information the White House doesn't have, and presumably you don't have and certainly I don't have, but that seems to me that what you're describing, at least in theory, is a far greater threat than a guy with explosives on an airplane, whether or not he succeeds in blowing them up.

RW: Well it's the most important line of defense. I don't know that it's a threat in itself. But you can defend every airport as much as you like, in the end though the most efficient, safest, border line for security has got to be human intelligence. There seems to have been plenty of human intelligence in this case.
---
KO: We're joined now by Arianna Huffington, cofounder, editor in chief of Huffington Post. Good evening.

AH: Good evening, Keith

KO: Ah, Richard's last point there, forgive me if I'm a little flustered, but that seemed a little startling to contemplate that in a day and age when presumably we're all, whatever we think of the threat of terror in this world, presumably we're all on the same side if we have something to do with this country, that somebody may be deliberately, in the counterterrorism system that we employ around the world, deliberately withholding information, no matter what the consequences might be. What do you think of that?

AH: I know, it was an astounding statement, especially since Richard said that he had talked to people in the White House who are leaning towards that conclusion in terms of a systemic failure in terms of how our intelligence system is operating...



This same hypothesis was followed up later with that doyen of intelligence and security Arianna Huffington, everyone’s favorite ACT-UP extremist Rachael Madcow included this information on her show subsequently (she also reported on the right wing anti-government tea –party murder of the US Census worker in Appalachia that didn’t really happen, back in the late summer also!)

Is this just another Hobama counter-intel-op or is it a shrewd attempt to take another crisis and not waste it by using the opportunity to discredit and damage that longtime hated and feared democrat boogeyman the CIA?

Any chance the recently leaked (aka planted) story appearing in the NYT of “Feared Spectacular Terror Attack at Obama's Inauguration” has any connection to this Whitehouse’s political difficulties, a distraction or sympathy play? Why would this story about something that did not happen a year ago be “breaking news” today?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/04/feared-terror-attack-obamas-inauguration/

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/17/magazine/17Terror-t.html?pagewanted=all

Obama=Jimmy Carter=well intentioned, but clueless and ineffective at best. The solution is fairly simple, but extremely politically incorrect. Any person appearing to be an Arab Muslim, or having a name like Mohammed, Abdulla, Hassan, etc, gets extensively searched and questioned before getting on a plane. Folks with a "good guy" card (aka U.S. military ID, police badge, or CCW and not otherwise disqualified by the above) get to carry on board.

__________________
Whoever said there's nothing more expensive than a cheap Mercedes never had a cheap Jaguar.

83 300D Turbo with manual conversion, early W126 vented front rotors and H4 headlights 400,xxx miles
08 Suzuki GSX-R600 M4 Slip-on 22,xxx miles
88 Jaguar XJS V12 94,xxx miles. Work in progress.

No rebute will be forth coming

they believe it to be true -

RM and AH are the gods of turth

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBbAZVw3_7A

__________________

1972 W115 220D/8 SLS, Coffman Starter "Ümläüt"

(\__/)
(='.'=) This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your
(")_(") signature to help him gain world domination

The turth? You can't handle the turth.

Congratulations..........using Richard Wolfe as your source and drawing a conclusion about what the administration thinks.

Why am I not surprised...........another trolling post.

Thread closed.