Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Report: Intelligence Unit Told Before 9/11 to Stop Tracking Bin Laden

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-25-11 09:49 AM
Original message
Report: Intelligence Unit Told Before 9/11 to Stop Tracking Bin Laden
Report: Intelligence Unit Told Before 9/11 to Stop Tracking Bin Laden

Monday 23 May 2011

by Jeffrey Kaye, Truthout

A great deal of controversy has arisen about what was known about the movements and location of Osama bin Laden in the wake of his killing by US Special Forces on May 2 in Abbottabad, Pakistan. Questions about what intelligence agencies knew or didn't know about al-Qaeda activities go back some years, most prominently in the controversy over the existence of a joint US Special Forces Command and Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) data mining effort known as "Able Danger."

What hasn't been discussed is a September 2008 Department of Defense (DoD) inspector general (IG) report, summarizing an investigation made in response to an accusation by a Joint Forces Intelligence Command (JFIC) whistleblower, which indicated that a senior JFIC commander had halted actions tracking Osama bin Laden prior to 9/11. JFIC is tasked with an intelligence mission in support of United States Joint Force Command (USJFCOM).

The report, titled "Review of Joint Forces Intelligence Command Response to 9/11 Commission," was declassified last year, in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from Steven Aftergood at the Federation of American Scientists.

...............

The order to stop tracking Bin Laden, therefore, came sometime between the origin of DO5 in 1999 and its realignment just prior to, or right after 9/11. In 2005, the JFIC itself was renamed the Joint Transformation Command-Intelligence, still subordinate to and serving USJFCOM.

MORE:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1105/S00202/intelligence-unit-told-before-911-to-stop-tracking-obl.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-25-11 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
1. SELF-DELETED BY MEMBER
Edited on Wed May-25-11 10:14 AM by leveymg
This message was self-deleted by leveymg.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-25-11 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. LIHOP/MIHOP
According to the narrative in the IG report, a previous JFIC deputy director of intelligence said that the JFIC commander, identified elsewhere in the report as Capt. Janice Dundas, US Navy, "directed him to stop tracking Usama Bin Ladin. The Commanding Officer stated that the tracking of Usama Bin Ladin did not fall within JFIC's mission." At the same time, JFIC analysis of purported Afghanistan "terrorist training camps" was also curtailed, with an explanation that such activities were outside the agency's Area of Operations and "that the issues where not in JFIC's swim lane."

According to the report, the Asymmetric Threats Division was "realigned" in summer 2001 under the "Intelligence Watch Center." The Intelligence Watch Center may be the Combined Intelligence Watch Center associated with NORAD, which is an "indications and warning center for worldwide threats from space, missile and strategic air activity, as well as geopolitical unrest that could affect North America and US forces/interests abroad." This would be consistent with the work DO5 did with the JTF-CS.



August 6, 2001

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
judy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-25-11 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
2. This is old news...
I heard a report on this on Pacifica radio as well.
However, anyone with open eyes, has known for a long time that GWB halted the search for OBL in 2001 when the ambassador to Yemen fired John O'Neill on Bush/Cheney's orders, as he was pursuing OBL and searching for the perpetrators of the attack on the USS Cole.

John O'Neill, as we know came back to the US furious and disappointed and jobless.
He was given a job as head of security at the World Trade Center, and perished in the attacks.
It is in my view a well know fact that the Bush administration stopped tracking Bin Laden as soon as they came into power.

It is also my opinion that they were following the Project for a New American Century, and getting ready to at least facilitate their "new Pearl Harbor".
Oh how I wish they would be in front of a court, answering direct questions and listening to testimony on what they did, including using one crime to perpetrate another (Afghanistan and Iraq)
:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-25-11 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. NO, this part is new news - I had the same initial thought at first. But, read the story -
Edited on Wed May-25-11 10:30 AM by leveymg
a lot of this content about the role of this particular DIA unit and its personnel hasn't been published before.

Now, look at this further down the story:

In addition, IRON MAN's allegations also included charges that the JFIC and specifically DO5, had developed information that the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were the most likely domestic targets of an al-Qaeda attack. The IG report disputes this and claims, with less than definitive assurance, "Evidence indicated that the JFIC did not have knowledge regarding imminent domestic targets prior to 9/11 or specific 9/11 hijacker operations."

The IG report indicated that IG investigators spoke with a number of key ranking JFIC personnel, as well as the previous USJFCOM director of intelligence, the JFIC Commanding Officer and personnel from the Asymmetric Threat Division.

Earlier this year, a blogger, Susie Dow, who has been following the story of Kirk von Ackermann , a US Army contractor in Iraq who disappeared on the road between Tikrit and Kirkuk in October 2003, asserted that von Ackermann had earlier belonged to JFIC's Asymmetric Threat Division. Von Ackermann's vehicle was found by the side of the road with a computer and a briefcase containing $40,000 in cash. An Army Criminal Investigative Division investigation later concluded that he was the victim of a probable kidnapping, while rumors persisted that he was possibly going to blow the whistle on DoD corruption.

An associate of von Ackermann, Ryan Manelick, a former Air Force Intelligence officer, was shot and killed outside a US military base near Baghdad two months later. Manelick had earlier told various people that he was in fear for his life. Both von Ackermann and Manelick worked for the contractor Ultra Services, based in Turkey. No particular link between von Ackermann or Manelick and the IRON MAN allegations has ever been proposed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-25-11 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
4. Almost immediately after Bush came into office, he began deligating
everything to Dick Cheney, including our National Security. In fact, at one point, Cheney wanted to streamline everything through the Federal Disaster agency, or maybe it was Red Cross?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-25-11 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. "Sneer." - Dickie 'Five-Military-Deferments' Cheney (R)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnyCanuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-25-11 05:19 PM
Response to Original message
6. "Obama administration promised to be open and transparent,
but it has erected a wall of “state secrets” to cover up the crimes of previous administrations, and intimidate those who would try to ferret out the truth."


DoD Inspector General: Intel Agency Ordered to Stop Pre-9/11 Tracking of Bin Laden

By: Jeff Kaye

The whole story is over at Truthout, but I wanted to highlight the main points, and explain why this has any importance right now.

I wrote the story because the information came across my desk, so to speak, and while the 2008 Defense Department Inspector General report has been in the public domain for over a year now (see this page at Secrecy News), it was never really closely analyzed, and hardly ever noted in the press. Not one major paper has ever mentioned it. But since it involves charges regarding intelligence agencies and Osama bin Laden, much in the news as regards what was known and not known about his location and movements, I thought it worth reporting.

snip

Okay… so why am I hashing over this 9/11 and Bin Laden business? It’s really quite simple. Here we are almost ten years out from 9/11, and you are just reading for the first time about a military intelligence unit that was pulled off from tracking a major terrorist wanted by the United States, and a whistleblower — who ended up writing to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence when the DoD IG wouldn’t move on his complaint for over a year — from within the IC (IRON MAN is apparently now at DIA, his career apparently not suffering for his whistleblowing) who is saying DoD components of the IC withheld information on Al Qaeda from Congress and the 9/11 Commission.

I don’t think the implications of this story are only about 9/11. I write primarily about the torture scandal, trying to uncover what I can about the actual parameters of the torture program. What strikes me is this: how very, very little we actually know — how much we are limited by access, secrecy, lies, and normative obeisance to a mainstream narrative (of which I’m as guilty as anybody) such that it’s not even clear that our investigations are headed in the right direction or not.

snip

It’s not just 9/11, or torture, or investigating BP, the Koch brothers, the mysterious deaths at Guantanamo, or any particular one thing: the public’s need-to-know groans under a burden of ignorance and over-reliance on leaks from governmental officials who themselves are sworn to secrecy, or are invested with spinning history in a particular fashion. I can’t know the ultimate significance of the JFIC/DO5/Bin Laden story. It might be important, or merely a small side note. But we literally don’t know enough. The Obama administration promised to be open and transparent, but it has erected a wall of “state secrets” to cover up the crimes of previous administrations, and intimidate those who would try to ferret out the truth.

http://my.firedoglake.com/valtin/2011/05/24/dod-inspector-general-intel-agency-ordered-to-stop-pre-911-tracking-of-bin-laden/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-26-11 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #6
14. Now, hmm, why would the Obama Administration be like that?
I guess it is what they planned to be all along, though they had to tell us pretty stories about how different it would all be in order to get elected.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-25-11 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
7. "Smirk." - xCommander AWOL (R)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ljm2002 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-25-11 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
9. And yet still, people who don't believe the official story...
...are marginalized and called wacky conspiracy theorists.

This is but one of many pieces of information that, when taken together, have to make any thinking person take pause. No I am not advocating any particular theory of LIHOP or MIHOP, but ... well suffice to say it is a truism that Governments Lie.

And please if my innocuous comments here threaten to get this thread put in the dungeon, I request the mods delete my post rather than kick the thread out of GD.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnyCanuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-25-11 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Exactly. No matter how much we find out officialdom and mainstream media
conspires, lies, propagandises and outright bullshits us....

e.g. Gulf of Tonkin, Iran Contra, Watergate, Kuwaiti babies supposedly pulled from incubators by evil Iraqi troops and left to die on the hospital floor, lies about the WMDs that the mentally deficient horse's ass GWB was unable to find (no matter how hard he looked, whether in Iraq or under his own Oval Office carpet), Condi's absolute lie that "no one could have imagined they would crash planes into buildings", Pat Tillman's much revised death story, Jessica Lynch and the Pentagon created fake heroism story of her capture and the subsequent fake, glamorized rescue by special forces etc.

- we are the wacky ones to dare to raise our hand and suggest that we smell a rat regarding another of their tall tales.


Daniel Ellsberg: “Secrets ... Can Be Kept Reliably ... For Decades … Even Though They Are Known to THOUSANDS of Insiders”


Proving a claim of conspiracy is no different from proving any other legal claim, and the mere label "conspiracy" is taken no less seriously by judges.

Indeed, even Obama's information tzar - who advocates using the power of the state to shut down talk of conspiracies - admits:

Some conspiracy theories, under our definition, have turned out to be true ... The Watergate hotel room used by Democratic National Committee was, in fact, bugged by Republican officials, operating at the behest of the White House. In the 1950s, the CIA did, in fact, administer LSD and related drugs under Project MKULTRA, in an effort to investigate the possibility of 'mind control.'”

Can't Hide It

Those accusing Goldman Sachs, Dick Cheney or some other powerful people of conspiring to enrich their interests are often met with the argument that "someone would have spilled the beans" if there had really been a conspiracy.

But famed whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg explains:

It is a commonplace that "you can't keep secrets in Washington" or "in a democracy, no matter how sensitive the secret, you're likely to read it the next day in the New York Times." These truisms are flatly false. They are in fact cover stories, ways of flattering and misleading journalists and their readers, part of the process of keeping secrets well. Of course eventually many secrets do get out that wouldn't in a fully totalitarian society. But the fact is that the overwhelming majority of secrets do not leak to the American public. This is true even when the information withheld is well known to an enemy and when it is clearly essential to the functioning of the congressional war power and to any democratic control of foreign policy. The reality unknown to the public and to most members of Congress and the press is that secrets that would be of the greatest import to many of them can be kept from them reliably for decades by the executive branch, even though they are known to thousands of insiders.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/05/daniel-ellsberg-secrets-can-be-kept.html
(and more embedded links in the original)


I will also apply this request from ljm2002 to my own post:
And please if my innocuous comments here threaten to get this thread put in the dungeon, I request the mods delete my post rather than kick the thread out of GD.

Finally, read my sig line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kaleko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-25-11 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Only in America
Edited on Wed May-25-11 07:34 PM by Kaleko
can you find this obsession with the idea that conspiracies cannot exist, or if they do, secrecy can't be maintained for long from the prying eyes of the public. I have traveled in most parts of the world and everywhere I went, people readily agreed with Adam Smith, the great Scottish economist, who said:

"Businessmen only get together for one reason
and that is to conspire against the general public!"

- Adam Smith


I wonder who first introduced the laughable notion about major conspiracies being extremely rare and easily discovered into the mainstream Kool-Aid of US culture.

The CIA?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-25-11 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. If you question the official account, you're a pariah here
Edited on Wed May-25-11 08:14 PM by whatchamacallit
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kaleko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-25-11 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Quite the opposite -
at least in my book. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 13th 2024, 02:09 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC