So, the CIA strikes again. Remember 9/11 . . . that momentous event brought to us by Al Qaida, and the CIA? And remember also the reaction of the Republican's Bush Administration to the failures of the CIA and the FBI to prevent the attack? They created the Department of Homeland Security. When in doubt, reorganize seems to be a classic Republican approach to problems that they wish not to deal with.
The central issue then was the incompetence of our intelligence agencies, principally the CIA and the FBI. They failed both on their intelligence analysis and on their willingness to share information. Had they been competent, and had we then had competent leadership in the White House, 9/11 would never have happened. So Bush created this huge department, but, guess what? It did not include the two agencies most responsible for the failures that led to 9/11. We have two incompetent agencies, and in response we create a department to coordinate all the other agencies, except the two most at fault. Huh?
So, now, we have a second example. A Nigerian linked to Al Qaida and known to the CIA as a potential terrorist, was allowed to board a US airline with explosive devices strapped to his leg. Two failures here: first the CIA failed to add two and two and get four. Second, the airline security system is more concerned with preventing breast milk and perfume from getting on board than explosive devices.
Ok, what’s next? Well, I guess if the Republicans were in charge we would create an even bigger department, maybe the Department of Global Security, which would fold Homeland Security into a larger department that folds all remaining federal agencies into one big department, except of course the CIA and the FBI. Can’t have anyone fussing with them, can we? Actually, the CIA seems to be a quintessential republican agency—it is both incompetent and arrogant. No wonder Poppy Bush ran the place.
Now the republicans are declaiming the Democrats, claiming that they are “soft on National Security.” Huh . . . the guys who allowed 9/11 to occur on their watch yelling about being soft on security. Now, that’s funny . . .
And elsewhere Janet Napolitano allowed as how she may have misspoken. She says that she was misunderstood, and that she really meant that the system worked in the case of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee.