Obviously:  9/11 happened.

 

Bruce

 

 

 

January 7, 2005

C.I.A. Report Finds Its Officials Failed in Pre-9/11 Efforts

By DOUGLAS JEHL

 

WASHINGTON, Jan. 6 - An internal investigation by the Central Intelligence

Agency has concluded that officials who served at the highest levels of the

agency should be held accountable for failing to allocate adequate resources

to combating terrorism before the Sept. 11 attacks, according to current and

former intelligence officials.

 

The conclusion is spelled out in a near-final version of a report by John

Helgerson, the agency's inspector general, who reports to Congress as well

as to the C.I.A. Among those most sharply criticized in the report, the

officials said, are George J. Tenet, the former intelligence chief, and

James L. Pavitt, the former deputy director of operations. Both Mr. Tenet

and Mr. Pavitt stepped down from their posts last summer.

 

The findings, which are still classified, pose a quandary for the C.I.A. and

the administration, particularly since President Bush awarded a Medal of

Freedom to Mr. Tenet last month. It is not clear whether either the agency

or the White House has the appetite to reprimand Mr. Tenet, Mr. Pavitt or

others.

 

The report says that Mr. Pavitt, among others, failed to meet an acceptable

standard of performance, and it recommends that his conduct be assessed by

an internal review board for possible disciplinary action, the officials

said. The criticism of Mr. Tenet is cast in equally strong terms, the

officials said, but they would not say whether it reached a judgment about

whether his performance had been acceptable.

 

As described by the officials, the basic conclusion that the C.I.A. paid too

little heed to the threat posed by terrorism echoes those reached in the

last two years by the joint Congressional panel on the Sept. 11 attacks and

by the independent commission that investigated those attacks. But the

criticisms of senior C.I.A. officials are more direct and personal than

those spelled out in either of those two previous formal assessments. The

findings were described by people who have read or been briefed on

significant parts of the near-final version of the document. But the

officials said the conclusions could still change on the basis of responses

being solicited from those criticized in the document. Mr. Tenet and Mr.

Pavitt are among those from whom Mr. Helgerson has solicited responses, the

officials said. A final report is expected to be completed within six weeks.

 

The review was ordered by the joint Congressional panel, which asked in

December 2002 that the Central Intelligence Agency's inspector general

determine "whether and to what extent personnel at all levels should be held

accountable" for any mistakes that contributed to the failure to disrupt the

attacks. A Justice Department review completed last summer in response to a

separate Congressional request, but not yet made public, identified missteps

by a handful of midlevel officials at the F.B.I. but did not recommend that

anyone be disciplined, government officials have said.

 

The C.I.A. would not comment on the report. A spokesman for Mr. Tenet, Bill

Harlow, also declined to comment on it, except to say that Mr. Tenet had

recently reviewed parts of the report and would be responding to it soon.

But Mr. Harlow said that "to criticize Mr. Tenet for devoting insufficient

resources to counterterrorism would be absurd."

 

In response to questions, Mr. Pavitt confirmed that he had read parts of the

report, and that it concluded that "I, or components or processes for which

I was responsible, may not have performed in a satisfactory manner." Mr.

Pavitt said that he disagreed with the findings "on many accounts" and had

provided a dissent to Mr. Helgerson.

 

"I believe the findings are flawed," Mr. Pavitt said. He acknowledged that

the agency's directorate of operations, which he supervised, did not have

adequate resources before the Sept. 11 attacks but said that he had

"consistently fought for additional resources, commencing that effort in

1997 and stopping only in August 2004 when I retired."

 

Still, Mr. Pavitt said, "I was the one ultimately responsible for the D.O.

during the period in question." He added, "If blame is to be passed down,

and if the facts on the issue are clear, not blurred as they are in the I.G.

report, then that blame is mine and mine alone."

 

Some other current and former intelligence officials who described the

document also expressed strong objections to it, saying that it failed to

account for the C.I.A.'s successes in combating terrorism before Sept. 11

and failed to acknowledge the obstacles that stood in the way of broader

successes. But others praised the review for directing its criticism at

senior levels of the agency rather than at the working ranks.

 

Mr. Helgerson, the agency's inspector general, is a career C.I.A. official

who served as deputy director of intelligence and as chairman of the

National Intelligence Council, the high-level panel responsible for issuing

government-wide National Intelligence Estimates and other strategic

intelligence assessments. But in the years immediately preceding the Sept.

11 attacks, he was working in jobs not related to terrorism, including a

stint outside the C.I.A. from March 2000 to August 2001 as deputy director

of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency.

 

The vast bulk of Mr. Helgerson's report was completed last summer,

intelligence officials said, but its completion was delayed while the

document was reviewed first by John E. McLaughlin, who became acting

intelligence chief after Mr. Tenet's departure, and then Porter J. Goss, who

became director of central intelligence in September.

 

It is not clear what punitive measures, if any, the C.I.A. could take on the

basis of the report. Mr. Goss asked Mr. Helgerson last fall to defer any

final judgments to a C.I.A. Accountability Review Board, intelligence

officials have said, and Mr. Helgerson appears to have accepted that

recommendation. Within the C.I.A., such a panel would routinely be led by

the agency's No. 3 official, and would have the power to recommend whether

individuals should be disciplined for actions they took or failed to take.

But such a panel would have a limited ability to reprimand those no longer

employed by the C.I.A., current and former intelligence officials say.

 

A former intelligence official who criticized the findings said that "plenty

of fault can be found" with the agency's performance "with the benefit of

20/20 hindsight." But the former official said, "Everyone I knew - analyst,

operator, support personnel, seniors and juniors - were working flat out

many, many months in advance of the 11 September attacks to stop those and

like attacks."

 

"To round up the good guys and shoot them for doing their jobs - I can't

help but shake my head in dismay," the official said.

 

Among the episodes that the officials said was cited in the report was a 30

percent cut in the budget and personnel of the C.I.A.'s Counterterrorist

Center, imposed in the autumn of 1999, not long after Mr. Tenet issued a

memorandum saying that the agency was at war on terrorism. In testimony

before Congress, Cofer Black, who took charge of the Counterterrorist Center

that year, has said the cuts left the center undermanned and underfinanced.

 

Mr. Black was chief of the Counterterrorist Center at the time of the Sept.

11 attacks, and two intelligence officials said that he was also criticized

in the report. Mr. Black recently stepped down as the State Department's

coordinator for counterterrorism and is retiring from the C.I.A.,

administration officials say. Mr. Black has not responded to interview

requests.

 

Mr. Harlow, who worked as Mr. Tenet's spokesman at the C.I.A. and remains a

close associate, responded by e-mail to a question about Mr. Tenet's

performance.

 

"Mr. Tenet constantly battled for additional resources," Mr. Harlow wrote.

"During an austere budgetary environment, he increased funding for the

Agency's Counterterrorist Center by more than 50 percent between FY97 and

2001, and the number of people assigned to that unit increased more than 60

percent during that period."

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/07/national/07intel.html?pagewanted=print&pos
ition=

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Take a look at donorschoose.org, an excellent charitable web site for
anyone who cares about public education!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/_OLuKD/8WnJAA/cUmLAA/TySplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to