No one in intelligence lost his job over the 9/11 failures, and we might even find the same individuals dropped the ball here. One assumes Obama is going to fire someone, and he should.

I would argue that it is precisely the 'fire somebody!' mentality that is crippling the process. Your post seems to imply that there would have to be a policy decision that a combination of factors x,y,and z would mean automatic placement on the no-fly list, which would then prevent entry by people we would want to let in, such as military-to-military contacts. Rather, it seems to me that combinations of factors should trigger an automatic EVALUATION by policy analyst, who would be charge with making a recommendatin on admit/no admit, which would then be approved or disapproved by a policy official. Unfortunately, these days, no one wants to take personal responsibility for a decision, I would say understandably so, since the first action that happens when someone makes a decision that in hindsight turns out to be wrong, the 'fire the guy' chorus rings up. So we go to automatic procedures instead, from 'zero tolerance' policies in schools that result in kids being strip searched for over the counter ibuprofen, to automatic searches for everyone from toddlers to wheelchair bound grannies. We have theater instead of intelligence, and as long as we focus on assigning blame instead of developing effective, albeit difficult, analysis and decision processes, we will continue to have these kinds of 'failures'.

The nature of the intelligence community is secrecy and separation of power. Their whole MO is based on a belief in the duplicity of people. Spies are trained to lie in order to gain information. I don't believe that the "intelligence community" will ever change as this is who they are. Sharing information erodes the power held by these agencies. They are all about power. The solution is transparency...not happening until the system is transformed.

The problem is that NOW THAT IT'S HAPPENED, every Monday-morning quarterback thinks, sure; I could have put that together easily from the available information. For them, the clues all point to an inescapable conclusion, and there's no penalty for being wrong anyway.

Fortunately, prominent Republican voices are urging caution, and pointing out that it's fairly easy to predict yesterday's weather.

Oh, wait....

His father giving his name ALONE was sufficient for him to be on a no-fly list, or at the very least, a strip-search list.

Whether other information was possessed and shared is hardly relevant.

That it wasn't is a second consideration, added to the 1st obvious failure.

jim p may be right, but what i didn't see here -- and what for me crosses the threshhold -- is that beyond his pop outing him, he was banned from returning to the UK. That, certainly (w/the other info) should have gotten him on to the no-fly list.

His father giving his name ALONE was sufficient for him to be on a no-fly list, or at the very least, a strip-search list. -- jim p. @14:54

Really? Suppose you quarrelled with your brother and he went to the authorities and said he thought you were radicalised, with terrorist tendencies and, as proof, said "well he's disappeared, I think he might be in Yemen, getting terrorist training from Al Quaeda". Meanwhile, you're visiting your girlfriend in Rome, living it up. When you get ready to go home, people at the Da Vinci airport there, tipped off by the US authorities, tell you you're on a no-fly list and clap you into jail, telling you things will get sorted out by-and-by, but not before the end of the year festivities are over. I'm sure you'd have appreciated it greatly, if the "Act first, ask questions later" principle had been applied to you, on your estranged brother's say so.

"The father told us he was dangerous! And al Qaeda said it was looking for a Nigerian! Simple!"

And yet "Bin Laden determined to strike in the U.S." was vague, historical information.

Now, ulrich's argument, @15:07 makes much more sense. I do have to wonder though... Did we know, ahead of the incident, that he'd been forbidden from returning to UK and why? UK''s intelligence is supposed to share their stuff with ours, but... Not only is there the usual, "it's *my* dunghill!", cocky rivalry between them but, the last time they shared their investigation with us, we jumped in with great boots, took over, pushed them to speed things up and they ended up not being able to round all the perps, because they were forewarned and fled. Meanwhile, we have not been able to take shampoo or baby formula on board plane ever since...

In the computer security field we have a concept of "white listing" and "black listing". As threats have increased over the last few decades, the "black list" has become the default mode.

Obviously it would cost more in terms of security to put everyone on the blacklist, but it would make the political equation much easier to deal with.

First of all it would remove any stigma of being on a list: there would never be any guarantee you would skip secondary screening.

Second, the idea of profiling would go out the window: everyone would be considered a threat.

Third: no intelligence would leak as our agencies pass around new lists of potential terrorists. This feature of our current system allows terrorists to probe the system: the Christmas bomber had already flown into the US, and had just arrived from Nigeria, so he was safe. He may not have even had explosives on the first flight.

If we had picked up on the threat early, he might have been stopped in Nigeria...alerting his handlers. This is speculation, but it is simple to appreciate the benefits.

Another problem is that you can structure the breach: get an old lady to sneak explosives past security then meet up with the bomber in the safe area. In Seattle, the entire airport is open once you pass the security barrier.

Also, if you have 100% coverage, you can provide specialized service to anyone who demands more privacy. Maybe such services could require payment.

But one thing is bound to continue to fail: making lists, maintaining lists and matching passengers to these lists using limited resources.

We should also do away with carry-on luggage unless it is physically inspected.

Good points, and also note: Obama distinguished himself from his predecessor by admitting there was failure. That is an enormous "accomplishment" by today's standards. Shout it from the rooftops.

to exlibra: Really?

His father was a high-ranking establishment figure, an accomplished real word adult, and had a lot to lose. So, yeah, really. Plus, the guy was already on the UKs non-entry list, which a check would have revealed.

And the "act first" principle has already been applied to a million people on much much less. Your scenario of people putting themselves under scrutiny by their own and American authorities for the sake of petty revenge might happen. Getting hit by and asteroid might happen too.

This case is nothing whatsoever like your fantasy case.

Grumpy,

"And yet 'Bin Laden determined to strike in the U.S.' was vague, historical information."

No, it wasn't.

We know this because the Bushies ordered, for the first time in history, SAM batteries deployed around the site of a G8 Summit in Genoa, Italy in late July 2001, less than 60 days prior to 9/11, as a deterrent to the threat by al-Qaeda to hijack commercial airliners and crash them into American assets.

Of course, even though they were obviously aware of the threat, the Bushies thought it was more important to keep to their vacation schedule after the summit instead of countering the threat back home.

Yet, despite being in Genoa and aware of the installation of the missile defense system as well as the threat by al-Qaeda, just hours after the 9/11 attacks, Candi Rice, who was Chimpy Bush's National Security Advisor at the time, stated the following during a press conference:

"I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center ... that they would try to use ... a hijacked airplane as a missile."

I'd say that Spencer Ackerman did an excellent job of describing the process of organizational decision-making in a situation in which the stakes of failure are high but the organization is dealing with data at fire-hose levels.

It really is a case in which the "failure" is one at policy level rather than at individual level. That's assuming that there really was a "failure" in the process. Sometimes you just get blindsided and it can['t be headed off in advance.

Someone had to look at the possible data that should indicate a real threat well in advance of the actual case and determine when the subordinate organizations who handled the data first reached a conclusion and sent it up the hierarchy. Those of us outside the Intelligence Community have no real way of determining how that policy should have been established.

jim p: "a high-ranking establishment figure, an accomplished real word adult"?

Yes, if we have learned nothing else in the past 10 years, we know at least that we can be absolutely confident that wealthy bankers keep the greater good in mind at all times and never try to use their influence to game the system.

pbpbpbphlth.

And I love tomj's blacklist idea.

Nobody can ever travel anywhere without a background check and interview with trained behaviorists. Any parcel shipped via air, water or rail must be opened and sniffed.

Commerce would grind to a halt, but enough people would still have to go to their grandmothers' funerals that TSA hiring would more than make up for it. And because TSA employees get government benefits, the health insurance mess would be fixed automatically.

"As Kevin Drum concluded, 'The intelligence community plainly needs to account for itself here, and upon investigation we might decide that there really was a systemic breakdown. But it's way too early to say that with any confidence'."

I tend to agree.

Sure he paid cash for his ticket, but the international airlines in Africa routinely demand cash payment, as there is too much fraud with credit cards.

No, he didn't have much luggage, but it was purportedly for a short-term stay.

He purchased a round trip ticket.

Gotta run.

Abdulmutallab's father told embassy officials in Abuja that he didn't know where his son was, but might be in Yemen. The CIA had that information. NSA has information that a Nigerian might be used for an attack sponsored by al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. If all of this had gone into the NCTC, would someone have put two and two together -- setting off the process for pulling Abdulmutallab's visa or putting him on the no-fly? Maybe. And the rationale for the all-source, multi-agency NCTC is all about intelligence sharing. But remember: the inputs are that the guy's dad says he's dangerous; he's Nigerian; he might be in Yemen; and al-Qaeda in Yemen may be looking to use a Nigerian in a forthcoming attack. Is that really enough?

Once again, the hilarity of watching people who have no idea what they're talking about becomes painfully obvious.

If you understand databases, the answer is, yes. Yes, someone could have put these pieces of information together and could have stopped all individuals matching the name, description, travel history, and profile for a more in-depth security check. As in, search their goddamned body for hidden explosives.

We have tens of thousands-- that's tens of thousands--of people being paid to do exactly this work. That's all they are supposed to do--they are supposed to use databased information to create reports for wider dissemination. The idea that they are confused by a series of acronyms and "don't talk to one another" is a dodge perpetrated by the "journalists" like Spencer Ackerman (who has never met a blog he couldn't get fired from) who have been instructed to cover the asses of the people who leak them useless information.

In point of fact, they do talk to one another. Every single intelligence agency sends employees to every other intelligence agency for the expressed purpose of sharing, integrating, and disseminating the shared output they are cleared to share, disseminate and fuse with other pieces of found intelligence. They talk to one another every minute of every day. Except, it ain't about work. It's about the Redskins, their fatassed wives, and how they're going to buy a McMansion in Fairfax when the next contract gets approved. Or about Battlestar Galactica. Whatever. It's human nature. No one gives two shits.

There was a time when this was a badass country, full of whipsmart people who knew exactly what was what and could put two and two together. In the days before computers and printed lists, we had talented analysts and thinkers who defended this country with math and pencils and paper and personally-delivered poison. Now we have bloated bureaucracies staffed with every jackass with the self-invented idea that they, and they alone, are doing a great job and no one else knows what they're talking about.

I have never seen such navel-gazing in my life. If a man walks into a U.S. embassy and says "hey, my son is going to do something dangerous," then, on what planet, does that not constitute creating a sense of goddamned urgency to:

1. locate the son
2. track the son
3. make sure the son doesn't get on any planes
4. ask the father for more help
5. let everyone know who to watch out for

This might be hard to believe, but in a world where there are databases and computers that run pretty fast, it's really not a big deal to add one credible name to a no-fly list, a terror watch list, a surveillance list, and a WATCH OUT FOR THIS SUMBITCH list. I'm pretty sure we can do it. I'm pretty sure even the incompetent sons of bitches making over $120,000 a year to self-fellate themselves in a cubicle while wearing a green badge can handle such a daring feat. In the old days, they did it with index cards. Where's the excuse now?

Oh, that's right. The excuse is this:

Why, President Obama is a good guy, and he'll get to the bottom of this.

Right. As if. President Obama is just as in over his head as the last guy. He's not going to save you. He can't even keep people from walking into his own home for the expressed purpose of getting their goofy asses on Bravo.

It's as simple as the nose on your face. Incompetence reigns. You have to defend yourself because no one else is going to do it for you. So, quit carrying water because you're shell-shocked from past fights. No amount of jumping through hoops can compensate for the fact that this was a screw-up of epic proportions, and every "reform" enacted since 9/11 has been a joke. But President Obama is cool and he's funny and he gives great speeches.

Yes, and he can give a great speech at the memorial they'll hold because no one did their job. We have seen two pathetic losers--Major Nidal Hasan and this kid from Nigeria--kill Americans and come damned close to killing a jetliner full of people because of the incompetence of the people who have asked us to give up our privacy in exchange for their right to run wild through electronic world and suck up vast reams of data. In decades past, these two clowns would have been grabbed by the shirt collar and shown the door, foot to the ass optional. In the days when we had actual FBI agents and real intelligence professionals, these two sad sacks would have constituted a diversion for laughs. Instead, in the age of the terrified pantywaist and the shrieking blogger, they are immortal jihadist killers.

God help us all, because your government ain't up to scratch.

y life. If a man walks into a U.S. embassy and says "hey, my son is going to do something dangerous," then, on what planet, does that not constitute creating a sense of goddamned urgency to:

1. locate the son
2. track the son
3. make sure the son doesn't get on any planes
4. ask the father for more help
5. let everyone know who to watch out for

Pretty much every single world you can think of.

I mean, there MIGHT be a planet where a father would NEVER lean on or exaggerate to a government agency to rein in a wayward child...but this planet isn't one of them. Single piece of data, no corroborating hard evidence? Son, there are THOUSANDS, if not HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS cases like this. How do yo prioritize?

(And don't go pointing to the revocation of the British visa; that's for attending a fictitious university. Like that's never happened before with scions of rich families who want to play around in foreign countries).

(And let's not even get into the difference between fundamentalism and radicalism, and the difference between the various radical factions. Plenty of Christians are against abortion, but very few go to the extent of shooting doctors and bombing abortion clinics).

Face it. Most critics show how manifestly unqualified they are to critique intelligence agencies---because they fail to show any intelligence themselves. They can't handle the concepts of competing hypotheses and supporting evidence; it's all binary thinking, which is ill suited to the real world.

Oh, come on. Teh timing couldn't have been better for an 'al Qaeda' incident to come along and whip up the frenxy of fear in time to distract from a new front on the 'War on Terra' attacking Yemeni separatists...and calling them Al Qaeda.
They run around with al Qaeda jackets and team shirts don't you know.

The security failure is a deep fault that permeates our world.

The attack against the CIA was a far worse breach of secirity. The setback for intelligence gathering will last for years as the CIA grapples with wooing supposedly informant friendlies.

Flight 253 was an example of database envy. Each branch of our vast TSA has an envy of the other guys' numbers and names. Simple office jealousies probably are the cause of the f**k up.

Hi everyone. I will love the light for it shows me the way, yet I will endure the darkness for it shows me the stars. Help me! There is an urgent need for sites: Flonase overdosing. I found only this - genenic for flonase nasal spray. Flonase, the histogram of this is that parts who are even posted even must know more non-traditional establishment to set plan not to skip the insurance. Flonase, typically adhere the organization and you will leave people difficult, breaks reading up, issues using. Waiting for a reply :confused:, Tirza from Timor.