Accountability, Bush style

Surprise, surprise: there will be no investigation of CIA officials for the largest intelligence failure in US history. Any bets that Bush will back the decision of his appointee Goss?

Quote:

---

No disciplinary review for 9/11 failures of Tenet
CIA director bars accountability review for his predecessor, others

Updated: 4:44 p.m. ET Oct. 5, 2005
WASHINGTON - Contrary to recommendations, CIA Director Porter Goss will not order disciplinary reviews for the agency’s former director George Tenet and other officials who have come under fire for their performance before the attacks of Sept 11, 2001.

In a statement Wednesday, Goss said a report by the agency’s independent watchdog did not suggest “that any one person or group of people could have prevented 9/11.”

“After great consideration of this report and its conclusion, I will not convene an accountability board to judge the performances of any individual CIA officers,” he said.

Half of those named in the report have retired from the agency. “Those who are still with us are amongst the finest we have,” Goss added.

A joint congressional inquiry investigating 9/11 asked the CIA’s inspector general to review whether any agency officials should be held personally accountable and disciplined for failures before the suicide hijackings.

Spanning hundreds of pages, the report completed this summer recommended accountability reviews for former director Tenet and other current and former officials. Limited details have been provided by individuals familiar with report who spoke only on condition of anonymity because it remains classified.

Goss indicated he will make little — if any — of the document public, saying now is not the time to reveal how intelligence is collected and analyzed.

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9601246/

---

Tenet was a Clinton appointee wasn't he? I think this is just the CIA protecting it's own.... nothing suprising there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

Tenet was a Clinton appointee wasn't he? I think this is just the CIA protecting it's own.... nothing suprising there.

---

So it's Clinton's fault? ~:eek:

Goss is a Bush appointee. Where is the accountability here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hurin_Rules

Goss is a Bush appointee. Where is the accountability here?

---

You have to find out if Bush has stated anything about this or not - before you can say he is at fault. It could be nothing more then an adminstrator of the CIA doing what he wants to do - and letting it be known without consulting the White House. Or it could be what you are attempting to state it is. Or it could be somewhere in the middle.

Goss is a Bush appointee, and it seems reasonable to me that those identified as having made these sorts of mistakes should face the accountability board. Afterall...that's what it is there for. Goss made the call...and he should be somewhat accountable to Bush, so perhaps Dubya should be placing a call about now.

Accountability is not high on the Bush agenda. I doubt that will ever change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Harvest

Goss is a Bush appointee, and it seems reasonable to me that those identified as having made these sorts of mistakes should face the accountability board. Afterall...that's what it is there for. Goss made the call...and he should be somewhat accountable to Bush, so perhaps Dubya should be placing a call about now.

---

True

Quote:

---

Accountability is not high on the Bush agenda. I doubt that will ever change.

---

Very possible.

Redleg: Your posts of late, while relentlessly objective, have also been consistently lacking in content (and great in number). While I certainly appreciate the ninja-like display of Advoca-jitsu, it is beginning to annoy me, personally. :bow:

..

As far as the CIA thing-- do we really have to drag Tenet in front of an Accountability Board? I mean, isn't that what history books are for?? These failures happened on his watch and stained his record, and if he is indeed incompetent or deficient in some way, he's no longer in a position where that incompetence or deficiency is a danger to anyone.

If you ask me, when we're dragging retired CIA directors into the hotseat over alleged negligence in preventing an ENEMY action, the terrorists have won.

DA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Arroyo

Redleg: Your posts of late, while relentlessly objective, have also been consistently lacking in content (and great in number). While I certainly appreciate the ninja-like display of Advoca-jitsu, it is beginning to annoy me, personally. :bow:

..

As far as the CIA thing-- do we really have to drag Tenet in front of an Accountability Board? I mean, isn't that what history books are for?? These failures happened on his watch and stained his record, and if he is indeed incompetent or deficient in some way, he's no longer in a position where that incompetence or deficiency is a danger to anyone.

If you ask me, when we're dragging retired CIA directors into the hotseat over alleged negligence in preventing an ENEMY action, the terrorists have won.

DA

---

Perhaps it sends a lesson to his successors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Arroyo

Redleg: Your posts of late, while relentlessly objective, have also been consistently lacking in content (and great in number). While I certainly appreciate the ninja-like display of Advoca-jitsu, it is beginning to annoy me, personally. :bow:

---

Must resist the tempation - sorry could not.

~D

I just liked the delicious irony of having Bush and accountability in the same sentence. ~D

note: oops double post :embarassed: :embarassed: :embarassed:

Strange. Obviously some people screwed up badly, yet it is nobody's fault, no one needs to take responsibility (as always)? This kind of lack of accountability isn't going to help prevent future intelligence problems.

Though at the moment the problem lies with Goss, not Bush. While Goss is Bush's appointee it's hardly reasonable to assume every decisions made by every appointee is Bush's responsibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redleg

Must resist the tempation - sorry could not.

---

In the context, one of the funniest posts I've read. ~:)

The decision is Goss's, and he should be the one condemned for it. On the other hand, Goss is Bush's appointee, and as other posters have noted, if Bush cares about accountability for the greatest intelligence failure in US history, he needs to be dialing Goss's number right now and telling him to reconsider.

I think part of the problem is that Bush is hesitant to completely turn on Tenet, because if he does, Tenet may turn on him, and raise the embarrassing issue of how the Bush administration used Tenet's intelligence. Remember, the 9/11 commission never looked at how the Bushies used the intelligence; we've never had an independent commission look at that issue. Bush does not want this skeleton in the closet to see the light of day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hurin_Rules

I think part of the problem is that Bush is hesitant to completely turn on Tenet, because if he does, Tenet may turn on him, and raise the embarrassing issue of how the Bush administration used Tenet's intelligence. Remember, the 9/11 commission never looked at how the Bushies used the intelligence; we've never had an independent commission look at that issue. Bush does not want this skeleton in the closet to see the light of day.

---

Though it is speculation it is entirely possible. If I had to assign a probability to it I would put it in the 75 to 90% range.

I saw some research into the public statements made by Bush, Cheney and cabinet officials for their time in office preceding 9/11. AQ and the global terrorism threat was mentioned once (by Condi if memory serves.) Their focus was on the anti-ICBM missile shield. Clearly the emphasis was NOT on AQ at the administration level, and AQ was on the farthest back burner at best.

Sadly, I think the back-burnering of AQ was probably true. No presidential administration had dealt adequately with terrorism from Nixon through Bush 43 (pre-9/11/01). I do not believe this was overtly negligent, but it's hard to give anyone involved any "props" either. The attack may still have caught is flat-footed, but we were under-prepared (intelligence capability especially)even by the standards of pre-9/11 readiness.

Seamus

Perhaps Bush needs to find the Harry S. Truman closet of the Whitehouse and dust off the "Buck Stops Here" placard.