Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(London Times)   British police accuse Dick Cheney of nearly destroying their investigations into a major terrorist plot   (timesonline.co.uk ) divider line
    More: Interesting, Dick Cheney, Rashid Rauf, British police, plots, British, MPs, Tony Blair, American cities  
•       •       •

13788 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Sep 2009 at 11:13 AM (6 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



86 Comments     (+0 »)
 
 
2009-09-08 08:52:30 AM  
Dick.
 
2009-09-08 09:59:02 AM  
Ardent Dick shafted cockney partners, fiddled with insurrection probe, premature incarceration semi-wrecked it, given a hard time for his cock-up.
 
2009-09-08 10:10:17 AM  
Neocon incompetence? I don't believe it.
 
2009-09-08 10:15:37 AM  
Dick Cheney waterboarded and sodomized a girl in 1990.
 
2009-09-08 11:15:58 AM  
B-but... he potentially possibly maybe sorta kinda prevented a probable attack on the US! Screw all your damn foreigners if you can't see it that way.
 
2009-09-08 11:19:58 AM  
You're f*cking welcome.

Signed,
AMERICA

www.rgllaw.us
 
2009-09-08 11:20:28 AM  
Umm, the British do realize Cheney isn't in the white house anymore, right?
 
2009-09-08 11:20:51 AM  
Somewhere in a bunker, amidst rows of walk-in safes, Cheney gets up, grabs a red marker, and crosses off Britain on a gigantic map full of red Xs.

"I'll always have Singapore," the old man grunts.
 
2009-09-08 11:21:19 AM  

Toots McGee: B-but... he potentially possibly maybe sorta kinda prevented a probable attack on the US! Screw all your damn foreigners if you can't see it that way.


No, no, no. That meme is done. What you are supposed to say now is "Bush and Chaney are out of office; get over it!"
 
2009-09-08 11:22:12 AM  

Yogimus: You're f*cking welcome.

Signed,
AMERICA


If you finish the article, you find out that the guy ESCAPED from detention in Pakistan and we actually have no idea whether he'd alive or dead at the current time.

Whoops, our bad.

Signed,
Amurricah
 
2009-09-08 11:22:13 AM  

CloseYourMouth: Umm, the British do realize Cheney isn't in the white house anymore, right?


Sometimes articles are written about things that happened in the past.
 
2009-09-08 11:23:48 AM  
Sorry my

HotWingConspiracy: CloseYourMouth: Umm, the British do realize Cheney isn't in the white house anymore, right?

Sometimes articles are written about things that happened in the past.


Sorry my bad, from the article I got the impression the arrest was recent, not from 2006. Switching modes...damn that Cheney.
 
2009-09-08 11:24:14 AM  
Great, who'd he shoot this time?
 
2009-09-08 11:25:10 AM  
I'm still waiting for Cheney to peel off his face and reveal that he's been Saddam Hussein all along, and everything that's happened in Washington for the past 20 years has been part of a meticulously-planned, wildly-circumlocuitous plot to steal Fort Knots, thereby throwing the world economy into chaos, and allowing him to seize total control!

And those fools played right into his hands. Moo hoo ha ha haaaaa!
 
2009-09-08 11:25:53 AM  
Well, if it was so important, the British should have known to brief the man in charge.
 
2009-09-08 11:28:07 AM  
I'm not sure how this is Obama's fault, but give me a few minutes and I'll think of a way.
 
2009-09-08 11:30:44 AM  

Sir Roderick Ponce von Fontlebottom: I'm still waiting for Cheney to peel off his face and reveal that he's been Saddam Hussein all along, and everything that's happened in Washington for the past 20 years has been part of a meticulously-planned, wildly-circumlocuitous plot to steal Fort Knots, thereby throwing the world economy into chaos, and allowing him to seize total control!

And those fools played right into his hands. Moo hoo ha ha haaaaa!


www.madmann.com

Close.
 
2009-09-08 11:31:30 AM  
This is clearly an attempt to discredit a GREAT AMERICAN so that the communistic Brtians can promote their LIBERAL AGENDA through Barack Osama!
 
2009-09-08 11:33:32 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: CloseYourMouth: Umm, the British do realize Cheney isn't in the white house anymore, right?

Sometimes articles are written about things that happened in the past.


Unlike most television shows, we don't uncover a terrorist plot, arrest, touchier errm question, place them on trial, and convict them all in a tidy 60 minute slot. Sometimes it takes years to get all of this done.

This all started way way back in 2007, DICK was still the VP at that time.
 
2009-09-08 11:34:14 AM  

Yogimus: You're f*cking welcome.

Signed,
AMERICA


That made me lol.

bemis23: This is clearly an attempt to discredit a GREAT AMERICAN so that the communistic Brtians can promote their LIBERAL AGENDA through Barack Osama!


Yes, it is, and we woulda gotten away with it too if it hadn't been for you meddling Ameirans.
 
2009-09-08 11:34:53 AM  
Bush's fault.
 
2009-09-08 11:35:03 AM  
Are there any people who think Cheney was actually trying to make the country safer? This is just further proof that Cheney wanted to make the country afraid while doing little to actually protect it.
 
2009-09-08 11:38:32 AM  
Go fark yourself!
 
2009-09-08 11:38:42 AM  
In the spirit of bipartisanship, I move that we operate in a manner consistent with the Clinton/Bush transition: any attacks that occur through this Thursday are Bush's fault, and Obama is responsible beginning Friday.
 
2009-09-08 11:40:21 AM  
www.funnymofo.net
 
2009-09-08 11:40:22 AM  
This whole thing is fascinating to a level that trascends any notion of general facepalmery.

It is almost impossible to believe that whoever was calling the shots on the American side (humor me for a second) could have jeopardised the British operation in the face of this:

including a massive round-the-clock surveillance of 200 suspects

as well as this:

Mr Clarke added that the airline bomb plot trial had brought home the extent to which the myriad of terrorist cells and plots in Britain were connected and aided and kept in touch through key figures such as Mr Rauf, who was also in contact with the 7/7 bombers on London transport, the failed 21/7 London bombers, and the fertiliser bomb plotters picked up by Operation Crevice.

Forget about neocons and liburltards for a moment and just contemplate the monumental amounts of fail seeping from every pore of that decision to act before the plotters had got the tickets.


It is beautiful.
 
2009-09-08 11:48:03 AM  
I did not see any facts in that article, only belief, suspicion, and supposition. It was the Pakastanis that arrested the terrorist. At the time, the Pakastanis weren't exactly Bush's lapdog.

Their only lead is that some CIA agent went to Pakistan around the time the guy was arrested. Cheney! Of course!
 
2009-09-08 11:49:53 AM  
Why the Fark isn't Cheney under indictment for treason? Cheyney has perjured, obstructed justice and abused his power. Did he, or did he not do more to harm this country than Bill Clinton did in the Lewinski affair for which he was farking impeached by a vote in the House of Representatives.

/may all Neocons suck donkey dick in Hell
 
2009-09-08 11:51:57 AM  
Operation Crevice
Uhuhuh...huhuh.
 
2009-09-08 11:53:56 AM  
The British were hopping mad about that

I just thought that was a funny expression to use in such a serious article.
 
2009-09-08 12:00:48 PM  
Americans do not know how to deal with terrorism. If that isn't bad enough, it's the farking French who do.

Americans make constant speeches about it, grandstand endlessly, set up meaningless EVERYBODY PANIC warnings, then finally decide to move on their own in a blaze of glory that ruins everything.

Well done lads.

The way to do it. The proper way to do it is, you let your covert international intelligence work with it quietly. When you talk about it, you simply mention that everything is being dealt with and is under control. You share intelligence with all of your allies and work with them to quietly, inobtrusively make the problem go away. You find them, you track them, then you make them disappear without alarming anyone.

Is that really so difficult to figure out, or is real security less important than screaming 9/11 9/11 9/11 at every opportunity?
 
2009-09-08 12:01:09 PM  
Harvey Manfrenjensenjen:

In the spirit of bipartisanship, I move that we operate in a manner consistent with the Clinton/Bush transition: any attacks that occur through this Thursday are Bush's fault, and Obama is responsible beginning Friday.

If that includes any memos after Friday that read "(XX) determined to attack the U.S. using (YY)," then I think we gotta deal!!
 
2009-09-08 12:07:32 PM  
Not news to people who have paid attention. I will briefly quote Ron Suskind (The Way of the World):

When Bush brings up the airliner plot and expresses his desire to snap the trap shut, Blair is unmoved. He says he's quite clear about the position of his people ... With a plot as big as what is slowly developing in London, the terrorists will surely seek permission to move forward, and when they do, Blair asserts, we can run the thread right into Zawahiri's beard. (p. 44)

He knows how concerned Bush is about the coming midterm elections, that Congress will go to the Democrats and the rest of his administration will be a wash of gridlock and recrimination. Cheney, of course, is similarly concerned. And now Bush wants something done.
(p. 44)

Cheney makes provisions. It's all very tightly held. No one can know what's under way-no one, certainly, in the foreign policy establishment and not even most top officials in the intelligence community.

If this were run on a split screen, one image would be a man slipping into Islamabad in darkness in early August. The man is Jose Rodriquez, the director of operations at CIA, the agency's number four official, and the head of all clandestine operations and CIA stations around the world. He was moved into that position in 2005 by Porter Goss, as part of Goss's mission to rein in the renegade agency and make it more attentive to filling the needs of its "customer," the White House. Outside of Cheney's office, virtually no one in America or abroad knows that Rodriquez has been dispatched to Islamabad. It is not, however, Pakistan's powerful Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, that Rodriguez and Cheney are concerned about. It's that British intelligence will discover Rodriguez's presence through their sources in Pakistan or those in the U.S. intelligence community.

His mission is to secretly pass information to a selected Pakistani intelligence official, who will summarily arrest one Rashid Rauf, the Pakistani contact for the British airline plotters. Rodriguez then has to get out of the country undetected.

He manages this, and Rauf is quietly apprehended. As a whisper of the arrest spreads to a few top officials in British intelligence-first in Islamabad and then in London-they curse, throw ashtrays, and scream bloody murder. They know the Pakistanis would never have moved on Rauf without first checking with them. And God knows the Brits didn't the give the order.
(pp. 45-46)
 
2009-09-08 12:08:45 PM  

aerojockey: Well, if it was so important, the British should have known to brief the man in charge.


and that man would possibly have known not to carry that briefing on the top of a pile of papers he was photographed carrying. by the media.

/not a Cheney fan
//also not a fan of morans
///it's possible I missed a reference here
////don't care
 
2009-09-08 12:11:26 PM  
When will you retards finally admit that your incompetent bureaucrats are as incompetent as theirs?

read: they all are a bunch of farking idiots
 
2009-09-08 12:24:23 PM  

BunkyBrewman: When will you retards finally admit that your incompetent bureaucrats are as incompetent as theirs?

read: they all are a bunch of farking idiots


Hah, if you think we don't ackowledge that then you don't follow enough British news that isn't about 'nanny state' acts. But I forgive you, as that's all you're required to know to participate in a Fark thread about the UK. People here hate the government and its stupid antics more than Glenn Beck pretends to hate Obama in order to get ratings. Only difference is we're justified in hating our incompetent bunch of twatjockeys. The only thing that keeps people in line and from breaking out in revolt is the knowledge that the replacement won't be much better. That and they took our knives and guns and swords, can't have a revolution with sporks and yellow teeth!! Or can you? brb.
 
2009-09-08 12:24:33 PM  
Hey Dick! Did you still want to claim that Bush made all the decisions?
 
2009-09-08 12:26:27 PM  
www.timesonline.co.uk

1. Obvious: Excuse me. Is that your nose or did a bus park on your face.
2. Meteorological: Everybody take cover. She's going to blow.
3. Fashionable: You know, you could de-emphasize your nose if you wore something larger. Like ... Wyoming.
4. Personal: Well, here we are. Just the three of us.
5. Punctual: Alright gentlemen. Your nose was on time but you were fifteen minutes late.
6. Envious: Oooo, I wish I were you. Gosh. To be able to smell your own ear.
7. Naughty: Pardon me, Sir. Some of the ladies have asked if you wouldn't mind putting that thing away.
8. Philosophical: You know. It's not the size of a nose that's important. It's what's in it that matters.
9. Humorous: Laugh and the world laughs with you. Sneeze and it's goodbye Seattle.
10. Commercial: Hi, I'm Earl Schibe and I can paint that nose for $39.95.
11. Polite: Ah. Would you mind not bobbing your head. The orchestra keeps changing tempo.
12. Melodic: Everybody! "He's got the whole world in his nose."
13. Sympathetic: Oh, What happened? Did your parents lose a bet with God?
14. Complimentary: You must love the little birdies to give them this to perch on.
15. Scientific: Say, does that thing there influence the tides.
16. Obscure: Oh, I'd hate to see the grindstone.
17. Inquiry: When you stop to smell the flowers, are they afraid?
18. French: Say, the pigs have refused to find any more truffles until you leave.
19. Pornographic: Finally, a man who can satisfy two women at once.
20. Religious: The Lord giveth and He just kept on giving, didn't He.
21. Disgusting: Say, who mows your nose hair.
22. Paranoid: Keep that guy away from my cocaine!
23. Aromatic: It must be wonderful to wake up in the morning and smell the coffee ... in Brazil.
24. Appreciative: Oooo, how original. Most people just have their teeth capped.
25. Dirty: Your name wouldn't be Dick, would it?

/Steve Martin FTW
//DRTFA.
 
2009-09-08 12:31:53 PM  

Yogimus: You're f*cking welcome.

Signed,
AMERICA


What a cnut....
 
2009-09-08 12:34:16 PM  
Gordon Bennett
Americans do not know how to deal with terrorism. If that isn't bad enough, it's the farking French who do.

In an ideal world, that might work. Except for the fact that we can't trust our allies, because they're constantly sharing information with our enemies.

Haliburton, Carlyle Group, blah, blah, blah.... Not that I support the invasion of Iraq, but long before the U.S. invaded, France and Germany were opposed because it meant their national contractors supplying equipment for oil and other industries would loose out.

New government moves in, and American companies get put in charge of the rebuilding, and we award contracts to other American, and Global conglomerates. France and Germany are angry, but deny it's greed fueling their anger, but rather their humanitarian interests.

Yep, that's the main difference between how the U.S, and other countries deal with terrorism. We all just try to win their affections by seeing who can sign the most profitable contracts.

As for Rashid Rauf, that guy is probably long dead... If we learned anything when dealing with South American Death Squads back in the 1980's, it was that everyone conveniently *escapes*, and as a result they just happen to get shot in the back while running away. Especially if you have a camera handy for collecting *proof* of their intentions. If you don't have a camera, well then they just escaped back into the jungle/mountains/city and we'll never hear from them again...


The war on terror that we have here is different. We're not fighting political ethos that can be disproven with propaganda in order to win the hearts and minds of the people. We're fighting a religion. Winning hearts and minds is one thing, converting peoples' faith is something entirely different. And I don't mean changing an entire religion itself, but just destroying their fundamental belief in violence. But it is something of the same magnitude.

Terrorists are dangerous, and do need to be executed. Don't let them live, and preach their hatred behind bars. Get rid of them. Not just because they're a threat to us, but they've retarded the development of their own countries so much because of their actions.
 
2009-09-08 12:34:42 PM  
Okay, why did Cheney order it? Isn't the VP's job to entertain school kids that tour the white house?

/knows nothing about how our government works.
 
2009-09-08 12:35:54 PM  
Yeah, he "escaped". Probably let him out so they'd have an excuse to keep using illegal wiretaps.
 
2009-09-08 12:38:12 PM  
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2009-09-08 12:47:06 PM  

SpinzGirl: Yeah, he "escaped". Probably let him out so they'd have an excuse to keep using illegal wiretaps.


According to the BBC:

The story does not end there [the arrest]. Rauf's lawyers claim he was tortured in Pakistan and the next year he made an extraordinary escape.

Two police officers were accompanying him back from court when, bizarrely, they let him enter a mosque unguarded to pray, and he simply disappeared.

Last November came news that he had been killed in Pakistan by a missile fired by a US drone. But his body has never been recovered.
 
2009-09-08 12:51:02 PM  

elchip: Dick Cheney waterboarded and sodomized a girl in 1990.


Are you saying that Dick Cheney, former vice president of the United States of America, tortured, then anally violated an underage girl in 1990?
 
2009-09-08 01:06:48 PM  

Extra Virgin Palm Oil: Harvey Manfrenjensenjen:

In the spirit of bipartisanship, I move that we operate in a manner consistent with the Clinton/Bush transition: any attacks that occur through this Thursday are Bush's fault, and Obama is responsible beginning Friday.

If that includes any memos after Friday that read "(XX) determined to attack the U.S. using (YY)," then I think we gotta deal!!


Considering that there are probably piles of reports with every combination of terrorist group and target, there is a fair bet that whatever happens someone will be able to dig through the pile, find one that matches and say, "see, [insert analyst's name here] warned us that it would happen!"

AKA the "Nostradamus", "law of averages" or "team of 1000 monkeys on typewriters" approaches to intelligence analysis.
 
2009-09-08 01:08:21 PM  

fernandez: elchip: Dick Cheney waterboarded and sodomized a girl in 1990.

Are you saying that Dick Cheney, former vice president of the United States of America, tortured, then anally violated an underage girl in 1990?


He certainly hasn't gone on television to denounce this fact!
 
2009-09-08 01:08:44 PM  
Dick Cheney! Is there nothing he can't do?

AmIright?
 
2009-09-08 01:16:25 PM  

Yogimus: You're f*cking welcome.

Signed,
AMERICA


THIS ya limey bastards.
 
2009-09-08 01:18:21 PM  

Gordon Bennett: The way to do it. The proper way to do it is, you let your covert international intelligence work with it quietly. When you talk about it, you simply mention that everything is being dealt with and is under control. You share intelligence with all of your allies and work with them to quietly, inobtrusively make the problem go away. You find them, you track them, then you make them disappear without alarming anyone.


After 9/11 I hoped that the Cheney administration would do just that. I expected a full-court press of CIA operations world-wide. I expected Interpol and individual allied intelligence services (esp MI5 and MI6) to gladly open their doors to the CIA. I expected swift and expedient police action. What I got was a PNAC military crusade against brown people, an effort which ended in abject failure. Not only did it fail, its infection into Iraq actually made the problem worse by bolstering recruitment of extremist operatives.

To may amazement, the Cheney administration did EXACTLY what Bin Laden wanted him to. We over-reacted, curtailed our liberties and emptied our treasury. This was Bin Laden's stated objective!

So, my dear NeoCons, why do you support Osama Bin Laden?
 
2009-09-08 01:18:39 PM  

A-Rth-Urp-Hil-Ipdenu: This whole thing is fascinating to a level that trascends any notion of general facepalmery.

It is almost impossible to believe that whoever was calling the shots on the American side (humor me for a second) could have jeopardised the British operation in the face of this:

including a massive round-the-clock surveillance of 200 suspects

as well as this:

Mr Clarke added that the airline bomb plot trial had brought home the extent to which the myriad of terrorist cells and plots in Britain were connected and aided and kept in touch through key figures such as Mr Rauf, who was also in contact with the 7/7 bombers on London transport, the failed 21/7 London bombers, and the fertiliser bomb plotters picked up by Operation Crevice.

Forget about neocons and liburltards for a moment and just contemplate the monumental amounts of fail seeping from every pore of that decision to act before the plotters had got the tickets.


It is beautiful.


And there you go.

So yes, blame Cheney you farking failures.

/Keystone Cops
 
2009-09-08 01:20:45 PM  
He also invented syphilis and is personally responsible for the extinction of the rainbow snail darter.
 
2009-09-08 01:29:31 PM  
Of course the British are upset, the intervention by Dick Cheney, by which I mean the government of Pakistan, has prevented those terrorists from receiving a hero's welcome when they are returned to their home countries.
 
2009-09-08 01:31:24 PM  

Harvey Manfrenjensenjen: Extra Virgin Palm Oil: Harvey Manfrenjensenjen:

In the spirit of bipartisanship, I move that we operate in a manner consistent with the Clinton/Bush transition: any attacks that occur through this Thursday are Bush's fault, and Obama is responsible beginning Friday.

If that includes any memos after Friday that read "(XX) determined to attack the U.S. using (YY)," then I think we gotta deal!!

Considering that there are probably piles of reports with every combination of terrorist group and target, there is a fair bet that whatever happens someone will be able to dig through the pile, find one that matches and say, "see, [insert analyst's name here] warned us that it would happen!"

AKA the "Nostradamus", "law of averages" or "team of 1000 monkeys on typewriters" approaches to intelligence analysis.


So because there are loads of warnings a day it's excusable to ignore a warning that turns out to lead to a catastrophe? They should just hire more people to go through them... or hire more people to kill terrorists, old skool.
 
2009-09-08 01:33:12 PM  

Nick Nostril: He also invented syphilis and is personally responsible for the extinction of the rainbow snail darter.


The rainbow snail darter is dead?
 
2009-09-08 01:38:05 PM  

poot_rootbeer: Of course the British are upset, the intervention by Dick Cheney, by which I mean the government of Pakistan, has prevented those terrorists from receiving a hero's welcome when they are returned to their home countries.


You should read a little more carefully, he escaped. So not only did Cheney screw the pooch, the much feared turrurist got his "hero's" welcome.

TA--DA!!
 
2009-09-08 01:38:45 PM  
i240.photobucket.com
 
2009-09-08 01:44:14 PM  
Ahhhh, Dick Cheney. Is there anything good and valuable that he can't destroy?
 
2009-09-08 01:56:46 PM  
"Fearful for the safety of American lives, the US authorities had been getting edgy, seeking reassurance that this was not going to slip through our hands. We moved from having congenial conversations to eyeball-to-eyeball confrontations," wrote Mr Hayman.

"We thought we had managed to persuade them to hold back so we could develop new opportunities and get more evidence to present to the courts. But I was never convinced that they were content with that position.

"In the end, I strongly suspect that they lost their nerve and had a hand in triggering the arrest in Pakistan."


Considering that it was our farking cities that were the intended targets here, Metropolitan Police's Assistant Commissioner Specialist Operations Andy Hayman can just STFU about American "nerve".

I suppose responding to the Blitz was "losing one's nerve" also?
 
2009-09-08 01:57:32 PM  
i1.bebo.com

We took yer turrarists!
 
2009-09-08 02:11:26 PM  
You say "Dick Cheney"
like it's a bad thing
 
2009-09-08 02:15:35 PM  
Oh Puhleeze! The last airline bomber the British prosecuted (Lockerbie) got ten days in prison per murder, before being released!

As for for Rauf: After his arrest, he managed to escape from Pakistani custody under suspicious circumstances. Late last year the Americans reported that they had killed him, along with several other key al-Qaeda figures, in a barrage of Hellfire missiles fired from a Predator drone at a bungalow in Pakistan's tribal territories on its border with Afghanistan.

I'd prefer he was fried by Hellfire missiles than left to serve some minimal sentence in the UK, before being released to spend his life on the dole in London.
 
2009-09-08 02:51:51 PM  
Oh, is it just IRA terrorists you yanks like? Not the brown ones?
 
2009-09-08 02:53:58 PM  
keithrogan: Oh Puhleeze! The last airline bomber the British prosecuted (Lockerbie) got ten days in prison per murder, before being released!

Not. The. British.

The. Scots.

/plus, I fail to see how this straw man argument addresses the point regarding Cheney's dick-headedness. Just sayin'
 
2009-09-08 02:58:56 PM  

keithrogan: I'd prefer he was fried by Hellfire missiles than left to serve some minimal sentence in the UK, before being released to spend his life on the dole in London.


Rauf was wanted for murder in the UK, not as an "airline bomber":

"As for Rashid Rauf, the British had even more specific plans. He was wanted for murder in the UK. The Brits were preparing a case, with plenty of evidence, for the Pakistani police to arrest him and have him extradited to England for trial, just like any murderer on the lam. Instead, he gets picked up by the notorious ISI, where he'll be either tortured or feted-depending on ISI's complicated views of the matter-and rendered unsuitable for public trial in the UK or anywhere else." (Suskind p. 46)

But y'know, why give 'em some sort of due process when we can screw it up, leave them at large for 2 years, and then maybe kill them with a missile? It's a win-win!
 
2009-09-08 03:16:38 PM  

elchip: Dick Cheney waterboarded and sodomized a girl in 1990.



Yeah, but it wasn't the same girl.


/ waterboarded sally
// sodomized sue
 
2009-09-08 03:31:46 PM  
The guy probably had info about 9/11 tht Cheney wanted to keep secret.
 
2009-09-08 03:42:54 PM  

Slaxl: Harvey Manfrenjensenjen: Extra Virgin Palm Oil: Harvey Manfrenjensenjen:

In the spirit of bipartisanship, I move that we operate in a manner consistent with the Clinton/Bush transition: any attacks that occur through this Thursday are Bush's fault, and Obama is responsible beginning Friday.

If that includes any memos after Friday that read "(XX) determined to attack the U.S. using (YY)," then I think we gotta deal!!

Considering that there are probably piles of reports with every combination of terrorist group and target, there is a fair bet that whatever happens someone will be able to dig through the pile, find one that matches and say, "see, [insert analyst's name here] warned us that it would happen!"

AKA the "Nostradamus", "law of averages" or "team of 1000 monkeys on typewriters" approaches to intelligence analysis.

So because there are loads of warnings a day it's excusable to ignore a warning that turns out to lead to a catastrophe? They should just hire more people to go through them... or hire more people to kill terrorists, old skool.


How do you know in advance that's the one which will turn out to be true? If you "just hire more people", it's still very easy to overwhelm the capacity of the system.
 
2009-09-08 04:11:26 PM  
Meh. Personally I'd be surprised if this was the only time one or the other of our countries got in the way of the other's investigations.

Things rarely work out neatly.
 
2009-09-08 04:21:53 PM  
Interesting assessment of the situation..

It's a shame that the mistake resulted in nearly millions of catastrophic... oh.. I see..

Here's the deal. If you have a bug in-hand, you smash it. You don't watch it, and pretend to be like it, and watch all of it's friends, etc, etc, for months and years, waiting for the moment when the bug is JUST ABOUT TO COMMIT A CALAMITIOUS TERRORIST ACT, just in case someone blinks and you miss it.

It's easy when it's not your country at risk from those attacks.

Plus, could you imagine the outcry if it came out that our country had advance intelligence on the situation and they failed to act in time to prevent it?

Please suggest that there was actionable evidence against the almost 2000 people being tracked/monitored/etc.. If there wasn't, that was a waste of resources and invasion of privacy, if there WAS evidence, it was STILL a waste of resources because you had them in-hand, and to my knowledge, haven't scooped them up.

Is this how you handle ideology and forestfires? Just kinda' check them out and wait until the last second? Make the assumption that they are not being fruitful and multiplying while you "watch"? Assume they don't recruit or spread? Assume you know everything there is to know about them and their dealings?

I understand the concept of keeping your enemies close, but surely there's a point where it becomes dangerous to permit them to go about their business? Or what you THINK is their business?

Here's the bottom line.. He'd dead, or he's gone.. I'm happy with either eventuality because either way, he failed. Did he face justice? no, not really.. did it prevent him from martyring himself? absolutely.

Of course, how dare I suggest that your 10000% effective methods are foolproof? Funny how one or two guys can slip in and apparently put all of you into a tizzy.

Kinda' like the psychic who fails to see an unexpected death in their own family.

Bottom line, if you were the perfect intelligence-gathering community, and truly had it all nailed down, we couldn't have disrupted it in that fashion. If you DIDN'T have it nailed down, we'd have had another 9/11.

I'm sure that's a risk you're willing to take, thank you, but no thanks.

Now open your eyes and realize I'm british.

ok.. I'm not.. but I'm a dual citizen.. which is hardly the point, but I couldn't think of a proper ending here. ;)
 
2009-09-08 04:35:45 PM  
fark bush. fark cheney. and fark anyone who likes them.

/why do you hate america so hard?
 
2009-09-08 05:02:57 PM  

Sir Roderick Ponce von Fontlebottom: I'm still waiting for Cheney to peel off his face and reveal that he's been Saddam Hussein all along, and everything that's happened in Washington for the past 20 years has been part of a meticulously-planned, wildly-circumlocuitous plot to steal Fort Knots, thereby throwing the world economy into chaos, and allowing him to seize total control!

And those fools played right into his hands. Moo hoo ha ha haaaaa!


and then hit Obama from behind with a steel chair, while grabbing the presidential belt
 
2009-09-08 05:47:07 PM  
this is what happens when a national security matter is treated as a law enforcement mattter, libtards.

*sigh* - anyone remember the days when warriors simply killed the enemy?
 
2009-09-08 06:06:40 PM  

Dead-Guy: Interesting assessment of the situation..

It's a shame that the mistake resulted in nearly millions of catastrophic... oh.. I see..

Here's the deal. If you have a bug in-hand, you smash it. You don't watch it, and pretend to be like it, and watch all of it's friends, etc, etc, for months and years, waiting for the moment when the bug is JUST ABOUT TO COMMIT A CALAMITIOUS TERRORIST ACT, just in case someone blinks and you miss it.

It's easy when it's not your country at risk from those attacks.

Plus, could you imagine the outcry if it came out that our country had advance intelligence on the situation and they failed to act in time to prevent it?

Please suggest that there was actionable evidence against the almost 2000 people being tracked/monitored/etc.. If there wasn't, that was a waste of resources and invasion of privacy, if there WAS evidence, it was STILL a waste of resources because you had them in-hand, and to my knowledge, haven't scooped them up.

Is this how you handle ideology and forestfires? Just kinda' check them out and wait until the last second? Make the assumption that they are not being fruitful and multiplying while you "watch"? Assume they don't recruit or spread? Assume you know everything there is to know about them and their dealings?

I understand the concept of keeping your enemies close, but surely there's a point where it becomes dangerous to permit them to go about their business? Or what you THINK is their business?

Here's the bottom line.. He'd dead, or he's gone.. I'm happy with either eventuality because either way, he failed. Did he face justice? no, not really.. did it prevent him from martyring himself? absolutely.

Of course, how dare I suggest that your 10000% effective methods are foolproof? Funny how one or two guys can slip in and apparently put all of you into a tizzy.

Kinda' like the psychic who fails to see an unexpected death in their own family.

Bottom line, if you were the perfect intelligence-gathering community, and truly had it all nailed down, we couldn't have disrupted it in that fashion. If you DIDN'T have it nailed down, we'd have had another 9/11.

I'm sure that's a risk you're willing to take, thank you, but no thanks.

Now open your eyes and realize I'm british.

ok.. I'm not
.. but I'm a dual citizen.. which is hardly the point, but I couldn't think of a proper ending here. ;)


Here. Allow me, sir. I am British, right through to my unbrushed yellow fangs. What you said.
 
2009-09-08 06:10:03 PM  
So the investigation forces of two different nations weren't communicating properly. What a surprise. I'm guessing the Brits hadn't told us what stage their investigation was in.
 
2009-09-08 06:14:26 PM  

plainlyclueless: this is what happens when a national security matter is treated as a law enforcement mattter, libtards.

*sigh* - anyone remember the days when warriors simply killed the enemy?


These guys remember and loved it:
upload.wikimedia.org
www.turkeyswar.com
liamscheff.com
 
2009-09-08 06:41:37 PM  

Dead-Guy: Interesting assessment of the situation..

It's a shame that the mistake resulted in nearly millions of catastrophic... oh.. I see..

Here's the deal. If you have a bug in-hand, you smash it. You don't watch it, and pretend to be like it, and watch all of it's friends, etc, etc, for months and years, waiting for the moment when the bug is JUST ABOUT TO COMMIT A CALAMITIOUS TERRORIST ACT, just in case someone blinks and you miss it.

It's easy when it's not your country at risk from those attacks.


Damn right. Except that, in the West, we have pesky things like "law", "order", "due process", "legal protections"... You can't simply snap someone up*, even if you know they're about to kill someone. You have to wait until there is material proof, otherwise your carefully laid plans are shot to shiat at trial. By jumping the gun, so to speak, on these investigations, you jeopardize not only the investigation (which has now yielded little to no results because you can't get a conviction for anything serious), but the original operation may still be a go (pushed back a week or a year), the principals are still armed with the knowledge they had pre-arrest and will be happy to use the new knowledge gained at trial to produce a better operation (with less leaks).

It's harder to be the good guys than the bad guys. It's the price of freedom that some people will use it to hurt and kill others, but it is a price I would gladly pay. Those in the armed services literally put their lives in jeopardy to fight for those liberties; by supporting a trial even for Satan himself, citizens do the same.

Plus, could you imagine the outcry if it came out that our country had advance intelligence on the situation and they failed to act in time to prevent it?

"bin Laden Determined to Strike Inside the US". On 11Sep01, Condi Rice was scheduled to give a talk about the GDI - the Star Wars missile defense system that we sunk $30B into without a single successful proof-of-concept.

Please suggest that there was actionable evidence against the almost 2000 people being tracked/monitored/etc.. If there wasn't, that was a waste of resources and invasion of privacy, if there WAS evidence, it was STILL a waste of resources because you had them in-hand, and to my knowledge, haven't scooped them up.

Is this how you handle ideology and forestfires? Just kinda' check them out and wait until the last second? Make the assumption that they are not being fruitful and multiplying while you "watch"? Assume they don't recruit or spread? Assume you know everything there is to know about them and their dealings?

I understand the concept of keeping your enemies close, but surely there's a point where it becomes dangerous to permit them to go about their business? Or what you THINK is their business?

Here's the bottom line.. He'd dead, or he's gone.. I'm happy with either eventuality because either way, he failed. Did he face justice? no, not really.. did it prevent him from martyring himself? absolutely.

Of course, how dare I suggest that your 10000% effective methods are foolproof? Funny how one or two guys can slip in and apparently put all of you into a tizzy.

Kinda' like the psychic who fails to see an unexpected death in their own family.

Bottom line, if you were the perfect intelligence-gathering community, and truly had it all nailed down, we couldn't have disrupted it in that fashion. If you DIDN'T have it nailed down, we'd have had another 9/11.

I'm sure that's a risk you're willing to take, thank you, but no thanks.

Now open your eyes and realize I'm british.

ok.. I'm not.. but I'm a dual citizen.. which is hardly the point, but I couldn't think of a proper ending here. ;)


You've never been a police officer or lawyer/barrister, have you? Crime procedurals (except "Law and Order") rarely do a good job of highlighting the fact that there are cases where the evidence points to someone, but you can't convince 12 impartial windowlickers of it. What looks like a slam-dunk case to the cops and DA may be one racial-epithet-spewing cop away from "Not Guilty".

And yes, as I said above, sometimes you have to wait for the bad things to happen before you can arrest someone for it. We have nosy neighbors, cops, SWAT, the FBI, the CIA, the NSA and InterPol (and each country has a similar law enforcement structure), but they're not perfect. Locking everyone up except for bathroom breaks may produce a zero-crime society, but it's nowhere near ideal.

* There are some times you can. Cops arrest people all the time, only to let them go a few short hours later. "It's not legal to snap someone up..." may be a better phrasing.
 
2009-09-08 06:49:12 PM  

Mouser: "Fearful for the safety of American lives, the US authorities had been getting edgy, seeking reassurance that this was not going to slip through our hands. We moved from having congenial conversations to eyeball-to-eyeball confrontations," wrote Mr Hayman.

"We thought we had managed to persuade them to hold back so we could develop new opportunities and get more evidence to present to the courts. But I was never convinced that they were content with that position.

"In the end, I strongly suspect that they lost their nerve and had a hand in triggering the arrest in Pakistan."

Considering that it was our farking cities that were the intended targets here, Metropolitan Police's Assistant Commissioner Specialist Operations Andy Hayman can just STFU about American "nerve".

I suppose responding to the Blitz was "losing one's nerve" also?


Read the article you shiatfark. Your cities weren't the targets, blowing up planes in the mid-atlatic was the target. Because of your governments incompetance at the highest level, that pile of shiat got away and may or may not be dead. If everything had gone our way and your leaders at the time weren't a bunch of cnuts we may have had the ability to turn him. Nevermind though.
 
2009-09-08 08:51:13 PM  
Our bad there, UK. But what can you expect from the same bunch of morans who decided to invade Iraq, claiming Saddam had WMDs for use against the US, later claiming they got "bad" intelligence? Fark, you all, the French, the Germans, etc. told them they were wrong, but they refused to listen. I'm still annoyed with Rumsfeld's comment about "Old Europe." What a maroon.

Oh, don't blame me. I didn't vote for Bush in 2000 and 2004.

imagecache5.art.com
 
2009-09-08 09:07:01 PM  

thename: plainlyclueless: this is what happens when a national security matter is treated as a law enforcement mattter, libtards.

*sigh* - anyone remember the days when warriors simply killed the enemy?

These guys remember and loved it:


your moral relativism makes you a much larger douche than me, sir.
 
2009-09-08 09:33:05 PM  
upload.wikimedia.org

McNulty wouldn't stand for compromising a case by closing in early for purely political reasons.
 
2009-09-08 10:44:44 PM  
I love that the gung-ho Cheney defenders here argue that we should trust the government to covertly kidnap, tortue, +/- disappear people it decides are dangerous based on a calculated guess that they *might* soon act against us, but they also argue that we can't the government to regulate healthcare, or even tell school kids to stay in school.

Instead you argue that we should let the CIA do WTF it wants to "keep us safe" - whether that be warrantless wiretaps, kidnapping, torture, violate international treaties and the like without accountability. The reason I want the CIA to be accountable is not because I want to put America at risk by sticking to "misguided, idealistic, bleeding-heart 'ethics'." I want accountability because I DON'T trust the government and believe that they will abuse their powers for political, personal, and un-democratic aims. Already the 'Patriot Act' has been used as justification to investigate people that have nothing to do with terrorism and were never suspected of such. How soon (if not already) will these powers used for personal or political gain - i.e. a covert, but "legal" Watergate style break-in for example? I understand that we need the ability to investigate, eavesdrop, manipulate, and covertly arrest people. I just want the people who make those decisions to be accountable for them. Only then can we have checks and balances and ensure that our response to fear is not more self-destructive and "UNAMERICAN" than those we fear.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

The point of the TFA is that Cheney's maneuvering - out of paranoia or desire for a political victory in an election year - likely prevented the apprehension of more suspects, higher up in the food chain. At least the British intelligence thinks that is the case.
 
2009-09-09 12:53:17 AM  

1stgenwhtrash: 16. Obscure: Oh, I'd hate to see the grindstone.


rofl.

awesome.
 
2009-09-09 06:23:56 AM  

Dead-Guy: Interesting assessment of the situation..

It's a shame that the mistake resulted in nearly millions of catastrophic... oh.. I see..

Here's the deal. If you have a bug in-hand, you smash it. You don't watch it, and pretend to be like it, and watch all of it's friends, etc, etc, for months and years, waiting for the moment when the bug is JUST ABOUT TO COMMIT A CALAMITIOUS TERRORIST ACT, just in case someone blinks and you miss it.

It's easy when it's not your country at risk from those attacks.

Plus, could you imagine the outcry if it came out that our country had advance intelligence on the situation and they failed to act in time to prevent it?

Please suggest that there was actionable evidence against the almost 2000 people being tracked/monitored/etc.. If there wasn't, that was a waste of resources and invasion of privacy, if there WAS evidence, it was STILL a waste of resources because you had them in-hand, and to my knowledge, haven't scooped them up.

Is this how you handle ideology and forestfires? Just kinda' check them out and wait until the last second? Make the assumption that they are not being fruitful and multiplying while you "watch"? Assume they don't recruit or spread? Assume you know everything there is to know about them and their dealings?

I understand the concept of keeping your enemies close, but surely there's a point where it becomes dangerous to permit them to go about their business? Or what you THINK is their business?

Here's the bottom line.. He'd dead, or he's gone.. I'm happy with either eventuality because either way, he failed. Did he face justice? no, not really.. did it prevent him from martyring himself? absolutely.

Of course, how dare I suggest that your 10000% effective methods are foolproof? Funny how one or two guys can slip in and apparently put all of you into a tizzy.

Kinda' like the psychic who fails to see an unexpected death in their own family.

Bottom line, if you were the perfect intelligence-gathering community, and truly had it all nailed down, we couldn't have disrupted it in that fashion. If you DIDN'T have it nailed down, we'd have had another 9/11.

I'm sure that's a risk you're willing to take, thank you, but no thanks.

Now open your eyes and realize I'm british.

ok.. I'm not.. but I'm a dual citizen.. which is hardly the point, but I couldn't think of a proper ending here. ;)


I would think that if you're trying to find a nest of insects and you have one then you will follow it to its hive. If you just kill it then go "now where is that nest?", you're an idiot. No calamitous act was about to happen, one of the hardest things about this whole exercise was that they had to swoop and arrest these suspected terrorists before they had all the evidence because their hand was forced by the arrest of their friend in Pakistan. Whether it's Dick's fault or not I'm not sure, I'm just addressing the wrongness of your comments.

You seem to think that the disruption saved everyone, because off they went, perhaps at Dick's insistence, into the breach, and everyone scattered in the face of their awesomeness, when in reality they were only planning it, organising it, and were not about to board the planes that day, but they had to be arrested that day because this unexpected arresting in Pakistan may have spooked them.

Their plan would never have succeeded because they were so closely followed, it woulda taken a bumbling of almighty proportions, something only inspector Clouseau could have managed, to let them slip through under that kind of surveillance. More following and investigation would have made their prosecution easier, and found links to other organisations and suppliers.
 
2009-09-09 08:09:58 AM  
more false flag terrorist plots invented by the government, and prematurely stopped, because they were lies, the only way to stop them is prematurely...

CIA mind-cluck

educate yourself, or they will continue to do this, and sometimes the government actually carries them out... killing innocent people.

google "false flag terror"
 
2009-09-09 11:11:13 AM  
I certainly see the point in waiting for actionable material before making an arrest, but my point is that they were allowed to continue in an arena in which wasn't carefully controlled. (as evidenced by the easy disruption which ensued)

The intel community doesn't know everything, otherwise there'd be no point in watching. It brings to mind the various videos of idiots filming wasp nests from up close.

Here's the thing, if I formulate and discuss a plan with 25 associates, and not all 25 of those associates are directly involved, then when I, and others go down, the remainder of those associates have everything they need to know to make further use of those plans.

Now, if myself and associates were picked-up prior to finishing the formulation of that plan, no one has ANYTHING useful to run with because the plans weren't completed.

We aren't talking about a waspsting, we're talking about something that dwarfs 9-11. The "best" they were hoping for was like 8 ticket-carrying terrorists, potentially at a time in which they were laden with explosives in a public area, sent there because they KNEW their plans had been compromised and didn't tip their hand that they knew..

"yay! we got 'em?" Boom!? Lost 50, and half an airport, but look! we're heroes! we got them red-handed!

If you think these organizations aren't aware that they have been compromised and aren't ready with bad or misleading information, and undercurrent directives, to "color the water" and detect the leaks, perhaps using the leaked info to manipulate the agencies watching them, you're sorely underestimated them.

(granted, coloring information to detect leaks is old-school, and passive monitoring fights against that to some extent, but you still have to make a move before plans are finished).

The instant you think you've got them outsmarted, you're in-trouble because you're making it easier for them to redirect you. Far better to not take chances with lives at risk.

As noted, the situation was handled, and further situations from that quarter, prevented, in one fell swoop. Gee, he doesn't get to be martyred in our jail system, and everyone accused of racist profiling, planted or circumstantial evidence and all that stuff?
We don't have to pay for his meal and lodgings while we still have a homeless problem?

Perspective tells me that it was a conservative route taken, with a higher success rate, less collateral damage, and didn't rely on judgements regarding whether we were being deceived or not.

While you watch person B go to the terminal to get a plane ticket, person Z, in another country is following the same directives. If you snag Person A prior to getting those instructions out, you can quickly limit the field of risk. We don't always know who/where person Z is.

This is why you hear about partially stopped plans, and get suicide bombers that are KNOWN TERRORISTS. Why is a KNOWN TERRORIST on the street? not a SUSPECTED terrorist, but a KNOWN one? Because there's an intel agency out there who thought they knew the limits of engagement with that entity and in some cases, were fatally mistaken.

oh.. and they're there because Cheney didn't get the call.. yet ;)

Anyways.. whatever.. this is fark. just throwing my opinion out there.
 
Displayed 86 of 86 comments


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report