Author Topic: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?  (Read 641 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27068
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« on: November 22, 2012, 06:30:11 PM »
Susan Rice Lays All Blame on Intel Community for Her Misleading the American People

Ambassador Susan Rice has finally explained, in her opinion, why she misled the country about what happened during the September 11 terror attack against Americans in Benghazi, Libya. According to Rice, all the blame should be given to the intelligence community for her misleading comments made five days after the attack, since she was just repeating what they had told her.

A reporter asked, the American ambassador to the United Nations, "Ambassador Rice, would you explain your view of the controversy concerning your comments about Benghazi? And have—is Senator McCain fair in what he has said?"

"As a senior US diplomat, I agreed to a White House request to appear on the Sunday shows to talk about the full range of national security issues of the day, which at that time were primarily and particularly the protests that were enveloping and threatening many diplomatic facilities—American diplomatic facilities—around the world and Iran’s nuclear program. The attack on Benghazi—on our facilities in Benghazi—was obviously a significant piece of this," Rice explains.

"When discussing the attacks against our facilities in Benghazi, I relied solely and squarely on the information provided to me by the intelligence community. I made clear that the information was preliminary and that our investigations would give us the definitive answers. Everyone, particularly the intelligence community, has worked in good faith to provide the best assessment based on the information available. You know the FBI and the State Department’s Accountability Review Board are conducting investigations as we speak, and they will look into all aspects of this heinous terrorist attack to provide what will become the definitive accounting of what occurred."

Article
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

But....but....according to the head of the CIA, at the time, (the head of this country's intelligence agency), they knew from day 1, it was a terrorist attack, and not some spontaneous riot facilitated by some film.  So, did any reporter dare ask the appropriate follow-up.....WHO in the "intelligence community"?
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2012, 06:59:19 PM »
When Spies are successfull, you don't know much about it , that is part of the success.

When Diplomats lie , they are doing part of their job.

When a President sends a diplomat to do the presidents job , should we expect a lie?

I disagree with Senator McCain on the basis that this is not personal with Mrs Rice, if she was repeating a lie she was just being a good soldier and carring the load for her boss.

Instead the whole of the administration should be bearing this responsibility and the buck stops where?

Perhaps heads should roll , but the UN ambassidor should not be the scapegoat, I doubt she was in the room when the bad decisions were made.

So Who is still a good question.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16136
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2012, 07:23:11 PM »
The intelligence community she is referring to is James Clapper Director of National Intelligence who modified Petraeus's report for Rice. He is also the one who told the General he should resign.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57552328/sources-dni-cut-al-qaeda-reference-from-benghazi-talking-points-and-cia-fbi-signed-off/
« Last Edit: November 22, 2012, 07:28:28 PM by BT »

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27068
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« Reply #3 on: November 23, 2012, 01:15:10 AM »
If that's the who, he's the one that needs to resign....or be fired
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« Reply #4 on: November 23, 2012, 10:26:34 AM »
It is standard procedure to dismiss CIA people who have affairs. This is because(a) there is a perceived security risk, and (b) this is a prudish country.

No one needs to be dismissed. The problem was caused by the lack of proper intelligence in a chaotic country. It was an accident, and what needs to happen is that they need to improve security and to get better intel.

Susan Rice was only reporting what they told her to say. She is blameless. She is far smarter and better at diplomacy than McCain, who thought  singing "bomb, bomb Iran" was so funny he sang it often.

He has seven houses and married a beer heiress. That is where the story ought to end.He has no business in government.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27068
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« Reply #5 on: November 23, 2012, 11:10:57 AM »
It is standard procedure to dismiss CIA people who have affairs. This is because(a) there is a perceived security risk, and (b) this is a prudish country.

Not at issue, since no one is defending Patreus' resigniation


No one needs to be dismissed. The problem was caused by the lack of proper intelligence in a chaotic country.

NO, NO, NO....that has NEVER been the problem as it relates to the issue of Benghazi.  You keep trying to argue a point, never made.  Why?  No one is claiming we should have "known".  With the requests for more security, we should have been better prepared however

The "Problem" here remains WHO denied the ongoing requests for added security, WHO denied the requests for assistance at the time of the attack, and why Obama would lie to the American people when he vaguely made reference to terrorist acts in the Rose Garden, then immediately not answer direct questions on if Benghazi specifically was a terrorist attack, yet claim in the debate that he had, in the Rose Garden

There's your 3 fold problem, and not that we didn't have the right amount of intel to warn us of an attack on us, that was about to occur on the anniversary of 911

 

"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« Reply #6 on: November 23, 2012, 11:35:19 AM »
There is so much that you do not understand that it is impossible to discuss anything with you.

Benghazi is NO BIG DEAL. Period.

Only wingnuts get off on this. It is a fetish with them.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27068
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« Reply #7 on: November 23, 2012, 12:16:02 PM »
There is so much that you do not understand that it is impossible to discuss anything with you.

Yet you do......are you a closet masochist?  Point remains unrefuted...your efforts to argue points never made.  Kinda long your lines of making reference that Obama didn't cause the attack, or that Obama didn't condone the attack, as if anyone claimed or even inferred that he did


Benghazi is NO BIG DEAL. Period.

Actually, the death of the 1st ambassador, in 30years, on the anniversary of 911, is a HUGE BIG DEAL......period


"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Christians4LessGvt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10952
    • View Profile
    • "The Religion Of Peace"
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2012, 01:25:17 PM »
It is standard procedure to dismiss CIA people who have affairs. This is because(a) there is a perceived security risk

It seems to me that you do not see married CIA officals having affairs as a security risk?
Can you claify if that is the case?....and possibly explain this illogical position?
Blackmail, judgement, and other issues seem pretty obvious....
But you think it's ok for the married Director of the CIA to be carrying on affairs
as if there could be no bad consequences for the country.



Why David Petraeus's Gmail account is a national security issue

By Max Fisher

November 10, 2012

 
CIA Director David Petraeus speaks during a high-level meeting in the White House Situation Room.

The beginning of the end came for CIA Director David Petraeus when Paula Broadwell, a younger married woman with whom he was having an affair, "or someone close to her had sought access to his email," according to the Wall Street Journal's description of an FBI probe. Associates of Petraeus had received "anonymous harassing emails" that were then traced to Broadwell, ABC's Martha Raddatz reported, suggesting she may have found their names or addresses in his e-mail.

The e-mail account was apparently Petraeus's personal Gmail, not his official CIA e-mail, according to the Wall Street Journal. That's still a big deal: Some of the most powerful foreign spy agencies in the world would love to have an opening, however small, into the personal e-mail account of the man who runs the United States' spy service. The information could have proved of enormous value to foreign hackers, who already maintain a near-constant effort to access sensitive U.S. data.

If Petraeus allowed his Gmail security to be compromised even slightly, by widening access, sharing passwords or logging in from multiple addresses, it would have brought foreign spy agencies that much closer to a treasure trove of information. As the Wall Street Journal hints, investigators were concerned about Petraeus's Gmail access precisely because of the history of foreign attempts to access just such accounts:

Security officials are sensitive to misuse of personal email accounts'not only official accounts because there have been multiple instances of foreign hackers targeting personal emails.

A personal e-mail account like Petraeus's almost certainly would not have contained any high-level intelligence; he probably didn't keep a list of secret drone-base coordinates on his Google docs account. But access to the account could have provided telling information on, for example, Petraeus's travel schedule, his foreign contacts, even personal information about himself or other senior U.S. officials.

Private e-mail services like Google's, though considered significantly more secure than most, still have susceptibilities to foreign intrusion. And it happens. Technology writers have sometimes discussed what one writer called the "password fallacy," the false sense of safety created by access systems such as Google's that balance security against ease of use. Even with Google's extra security features, the company must also avoid making security so onerous as to drive away customers, making it an easier target for foreign hackers even before Petraeus possibly started sharing access and thus diluting the account's integrity. And, as a Wired magazine investigation demonstrated in August, personal e-mail accounts often allow hackers access to other personal accounts, worsening both the infiltration and the damage.

All of this might sound a little overly apprehensive, really, U.S. national security is compromised because the CIA director's personal Gmail account might have been a little easier to hack, until you start looking at the scale and sophistication of foreign attempts to infiltrate U.S. data sources. Chinese hacking efforts, perhaps the best-known but nowhere near the only threat to U.S. networks and computers, suggest the enormous scope and ferocious drive of foreign government hackers.

Some Americans who have access to sensitive information and who travel to China describe going to tremendous lengths to minimize government efforts to seize their data. Some copy and paste their passwords from USB thumb drives rather than type them out, for fear of key-logging software. They carry "loaner" laptops and cellphones and pull out cellphone batteries during sensitive meetings, worried that the microphone could be switched on remotely. The New York Times called such extreme measures, which also apply in other countries, "standard operating procedure for officials at American government agencies."

Even still, the publicly reported incidents of successful Chinese hacking such as a March intrusion that stole a $1 billion, 10-year research project overnight, suggest that the efforts might be near-continuous and the successes rampant. A 2010 Chinese infiltration of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce ended up funneling weeks of corporate data; even after the chamber thought it had reestablished security, it discovered that an office printer and a corporate apartment thermostat were still sending data, who knows what kind, back to China. You have to wonder what a similar infiltration into the private e-mail account of the director of the Central Intelligence Agency might have turned up.

Of course, the CIA director is not the Chamber of Commerce, which may explain why the FBI's counter-intelligence monitoring is so sensitive that just Broadwell?s access to his Gmail account triggered an investigation. But the fact that the FBI looked so hard and so carefully and that Petraeus lost his directorship of the CIA over an intrusion that many of us might consider minor or even routine, underscores the potential risk to U.S. intelligence entailed in Petraeus's, or Broadwell's, alleged misuse of his personal account.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/11/10/why-david-petraeuss-gmail-account-is-a-national-security-issue/
« Last Edit: November 23, 2012, 01:30:32 PM by Christians4LessGvt »
"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" - Ronald Reagan - June 12, 1987

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2012, 02:22:00 PM »
It COULD BE a security risk. Since Petraeus resigned, he seems to have agreed that it was, so I am not saying that he should have stayed on. He knows more about the job than I do.

Those two women, Kelley  and Broadwell, were truly idiots. Petraeus was also none too bright to set up such an insecure method of e-mailing Broadwell.

Again, Benghazi is NO BIG DEAL, just something for lumpenproletarian imbeciles to stew and yap about. NO BIG DEAL.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« Reply #10 on: November 23, 2012, 02:34:56 PM »
M:  So Mr Bond , do I understand it aright that you have had an illicit sexuall tryst with a woman known to be an agent of enemy nation?

007: NO!

Q: Well that is certainy a reli....

007: (interrupting)I have not had AN illicit sexual encounter with a woman who was known to be an agent of an enemy nation,that wording indicates it was a singualr occasion, I have had many such encounters. Also I have had sexual encounters with women who are in the employ of MI6, women who manage finances for organised crime and women who just happend to be nearby when I had an unscheduled quarter hour .

M: (nonpulsed)
Q:(shocked silence)

(time passes, Mr. Bond sips a martini)

Finally -
M: I suppose this means a scandal that will cause us all to resign.
007: Of course not M, old chap we are not Americans after all.
Q: thats true!
M, Q , and 007 break up in gales of laughter.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« Reply #11 on: November 23, 2012, 02:39:21 PM »
James Bond was not actually a real spy.

Nor was he an American.

Yes, it is true: James Bond was unAmerican as well as fictional.

But that WAS funny.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27068
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« Reply #12 on: November 23, 2012, 05:24:04 PM »
Speaking of "who", recall those many images released for political consumption to the masses, showing the President and all his folk in the situation room, feverishy watching the video feeds in the Bin Laden Raid.  No surprise here

Most transparent administration ever, my eye
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« Reply #13 on: November 23, 2012, 07:30:15 PM »
James Bond was not actually a real spy.

Nor was he an American.

Yes, it is true: James Bond was unAmerican as well as fictional.

But that WAS funny.

I wasn't shooting for realism.

"Gales of laughter" is not realistic for three British gentlemen in discussion.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: WHO...in the Intelligence Community?
« Reply #14 on: November 23, 2012, 10:17:45 PM »
Three British gentlemen would need to be pretty drunk to produce even one gale of laughter. Of course, that was long ago: the Brits are no longer so stuffy, I have noticed.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."