Jump to content


King Bush shows progress on war on terror


Recommended Posts

C.I.A. Closes Unit Focused on Capture of bin Laden

 

By MARK MAZZETTI

Published: July 4, 2006

 

WASHINGTON, July 3 ? The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday.

Skip to next paragraph

Threats & Responses

Go to Complete Coverage ?

Readers? Opinions

Forum: National Security

 

The unit, known as Alec Station, was disbanded late last year and its analysts reassigned within the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center, the officials said.

 

The decision is a milestone for the agency, which formed the unit before Osama bin Laden became a household name and bolstered its ranks after the Sept. 11 attacks, when President Bush pledged to bring Mr. bin Laden to justice "dead or alive."

 

The realignment reflects a view that Al Qaeda is no longer as hierarchical as it once was, intelligence officials said, and a growing concern about Qaeda-inspired groups that have begun carrying out attacks independent of Mr. bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

 

Agency officials said that tracking Mr. bin Laden and his deputies remained a high priority, and that the decision to disband the unit was not a sign that the effort had slackened. Instead, the officials said, it reflects a belief that the agency can better deal with high-level threats by focusing on regional trends rather than on specific organizations or individuals.

 

"The efforts to find Osama bin Laden are as strong as ever," said Jennifer Millerwise Dyck, a C.I.A. spokeswoman. "This is an agile agency, and the decision was made to ensure greater reach and focus."

 

The decision to close the unit was first reported Monday by National Public Radio.

 

Michael Scheuer, a former senior C.I.A. official who was the first head of the unit, said the move reflected a view within the agency that Mr. bin Laden was no longer the threat he once was.

 

Mr. Scheuer said that view was mistaken.

 

"This will clearly denigrate our operations against Al Qaeda," he said. "These days at the agency, bin Laden and Al Qaeda appear to be treated merely as first among equals."

 

In recent years, the war in Iraq has stretched the resources of the intelligence agencies and the Pentagon, generating new priorities for American officials. For instance, much of the military's counterterrorism units, like the Army's Delta Force, had been redirected from the hunt for Mr. bin Laden to the search for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed last month in Iraq.

 

An intelligence official who was granted anonymity to discuss classified information said the closing of the bin Laden unit reflected a greater grasp of the organization. "Our understanding of Al Qaeda has greatly evolved from where it was in the late 1990's," the official said, but added, "There are still people who wake up every day with the job of trying to find bin Laden."

 

Established in 1996, when Mr. bin Laden's calls for global jihad were a source of increasing concern for officials in Washington, Alec Station operated in a similar fashion to that of other agency stations around the globe.

 

The two dozen staff members who worked at the station, which was named after Mr. Scheuer's son and was housed in leased offices near agency headquarters in northern Virginia, issued regular cables to the agency about Mr. bin Laden's growing abilities and his desire to strike American targets throughout the world.

 

In his book "Ghost Wars," which chronicles the agency's efforts to hunt Mr. bin Laden in the years before the Sept. 11 attacks, Steve Coll wrote that some inside the agency likened Alec Station to a cult that became obsessed with Al Qaeda.

 

"The bin Laden unit's analysts were so intense about their work that they made some of their C.I.A. colleagues uncomfortable," Mr. Coll wrote. Members of Alec Station "called themselves 'the Manson Family' because they had acquired a reputation for crazed alarmism about the rising Al Qaeda threat."

 

Intelligence officials said Alec Station was disbanded after Robert Grenier, who until February was in charge of the Counterterrorist Center, decided the agency needed to reorganize to better address constant changes in terrorist organizations.

 

Our Commander and Our leader has shown us this Independence Day he is making progess on the War on Terror front.

 

No longer do we need to focus on small fish like Usama Bin Laden but now we are going after the head honchos the guys who are driving this War on Terror and the War on the War on Terror. People like the NYT. You see the NYT has brainwashed nearly half of this country with their far left propoganda, convincing well meaning people to believe Usama Bin Laden had something to do with 9/11 while convincing them Iraq was innocent on all accounts. Well now King Bush has made it clear NO MORE.

 

And I for one applaud him for his progess and our progess. God Bless America this Fourth of July. And by America I mean all those who support our President the rest of you are nothing but Bennidict Arnolds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C.I.A. Closes Unit Focused on Capture of bin Laden

 

By MARK MAZZETTI

Published: July 4, 2006

 

WASHINGTON, July 3 ? The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday.

Skip to next paragraph

Threats & Responses

Go to Complete Coverage ?

Readers? Opinions

Forum: National Security

 

The unit, known as Alec Station, was disbanded late last year and its analysts reassigned within the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center, the officials said.

 

The decision is a milestone for the agency, which formed the unit before Osama bin Laden became a household name and bolstered its ranks after the Sept. 11 attacks, when President Bush pledged to bring Mr. bin Laden to justice "dead or alive."

 

The realignment reflects a view that Al Qaeda is no longer as hierarchical as it once was, intelligence officials said, and a growing concern about Qaeda-inspired groups that have begun carrying out attacks independent of Mr. bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

 

Agency officials said that tracking Mr. bin Laden and his deputies remained a high priority, and that the decision to disband the unit was not a sign that the effort had slackened. Instead, the officials said, it reflects a belief that the agency can better deal with high-level threats by focusing on regional trends rather than on specific organizations or individuals.

 

"The efforts to find Osama bin Laden are as strong as ever," said Jennifer Millerwise Dyck, a C.I.A. spokeswoman. "This is an agile agency, and the decision was made to ensure greater reach and focus."

 

The decision to close the unit was first reported Monday by National Public Radio.

 

Michael Scheuer, a former senior C.I.A. official who was the first head of the unit, said the move reflected a view within the agency that Mr. bin Laden was no longer the threat he once was.

 

Mr. Scheuer said that view was mistaken.

 

"This will clearly denigrate our operations against Al Qaeda," he said. "These days at the agency, bin Laden and Al Qaeda appear to be treated merely as first among equals."

 

In recent years, the war in Iraq has stretched the resources of the intelligence agencies and the Pentagon, generating new priorities for American officials. For instance, much of the military's counterterrorism units, like the Army's Delta Force, had been redirected from the hunt for Mr. bin Laden to the search for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed last month in Iraq.

 

An intelligence official who was granted anonymity to discuss classified information said the closing of the bin Laden unit reflected a greater grasp of the organization. "Our understanding of Al Qaeda has greatly evolved from where it was in the late 1990's," the official said, but added, "There are still people who wake up every day with the job of trying to find bin Laden."

 

Established in 1996, when Mr. bin Laden's calls for global jihad were a source of increasing concern for officials in Washington, Alec Station operated in a similar fashion to that of other agency stations around the globe.

 

The two dozen staff members who worked at the station, which was named after Mr. Scheuer's son and was housed in leased offices near agency headquarters in northern Virginia, issued regular cables to the agency about Mr. bin Laden's growing abilities and his desire to strike American targets throughout the world.

 

In his book "Ghost Wars," which chronicles the agency's efforts to hunt Mr. bin Laden in the years before the Sept. 11 attacks, Steve Coll wrote that some inside the agency likened Alec Station to a cult that became obsessed with Al Qaeda.

 

"The bin Laden unit's analysts were so intense about their work that they made some of their C.I.A. colleagues uncomfortable," Mr. Coll wrote. Members of Alec Station "called themselves 'the Manson Family' because they had acquired a reputation for crazed alarmism about the rising Al Qaeda threat."

 

Intelligence officials said Alec Station was disbanded after Robert Grenier, who until February was in charge of the Counterterrorist Center, decided the agency needed to reorganize to better address constant changes in terrorist organizations.

 

Our Commander and Our leader has shown us this Independence Day he is making progess on the War on Terror front.

 

No longer do we need to focus on small fish like Usama Bin Laden but now we are going after the head honchos the guys who are driving this War on Terror and the War on the War on Terror. People like the NYT. You see the NYT has brainwashed nearly half of this country with their far left propoganda, convincing well meaning people to believe Usama Bin Laden had something to do with 9/11 while convincing them Iraq was innocent on all accounts. Well now King Bush has made it clear NO MORE.

 

And I for one applaud him for his progess and our progess. God Bless America this Fourth of July. And by America I mean all those who support our President the rest of you are nothing but Bennidict Arnolds.

 

 

1. What ever happened to the rule that prohibited alter-ego and celebrity accounts from posting in the BullPen that we had about 6 months ago?

 

2. Speaking of the New York Times, this is the same paper with a history of glorifying Stalin and suppressing stories about the Holocaust during WW2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. Speaking of the New York Times, this is the same paper with a history of glorifying Stalin and suppressing stories about the Holocaust during WW2.

 

Proof?

New York Times Buried Holocaust News

http://www.israelnationalnews.com ^ | Mar 14, '05 | www.israelnationalnews.com

 

Posted on 03/17/2005 10:58:10 PM PST by deepFR

 

The New York Times consistently buried Holocaust news in its back pages and downplayed the victims' Jewish identity. So states the first scholarly study of how the Times covered the Nazi genocide. Buried by The Times: The Holocaust and America's Most Important Newspaper," by Prof. Laurel Leff, has just been published by Cambridge University Press.

 

Among the book's key findings, according to The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, are the following:

 

* Holocaust news was consistently relegated to the Times' back pages. Of the 1,186 articles that the Times published during 1939-1945 about Europe's Jews, only 26 (about two percent) of them appeared on the front page, and even those articles "obscured the fact that most of the victims were Jews."

 

* New York Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger, an assimilated Jew of German descent, feared that the newspaper would be engaging in special pleading and thus deliberately downplayed news of the Holocaust and the Jewish identity of the victims.

 

* The Times only rarely published editorials about the annihilation of Europe's Jews, and only once ran a lead editorial about the Nazi genocide.

 

* Because of its importance, the Times helped set the tone for the rest of the media's coverage of Holocaust news; the Times "might have been able to help bring the facts about the extermination of the Jews to public consciousness ... [instead,] the Times helped drown out the last cry from the abyss."

 

* When the Nazi death camps were liberated, the Times' coverage downplayed the fact that the victims and survivors were overwhelmingly Jews.

 

Author Prof. Leff, a former reporter and editor who teaches journalism at Northeastern University, is a leading member of the Academic Council of The Wyman Institute. The Wyman Institute is organizing Prof. Leff's speaking appearances around the United States.

 

Stuart Eizenstat, formerly the U.S. ambassador for Holocaust-era issues, called the book "engrossing and important," adding, "One can only wonder in great sorrow how many lives might have been saved if the nation's and the world's conscience had been touched by full and complete coverage by the Times of what remains the greatest crime of world history."

 

Marvin Kalb, elder statesman of American journalism, said that Buried by The Times "stands tall in scholarship, style and importance ... it is an exceptional study of one of the darkest failures of the New York Times..."

 

Prof. David S. Wyman, author of The Abandonment of the Jews, praised Buried by the Times as "the best book yet about American media coverage of the Holocaust, and an extremely important contribution to our understanding of America's response to the mass murder of the Jews."

 

The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, located on the campus of Gratz College near Philadelphia, is a research and education institute focusing on America's response to the Holocaust

 

And as far as the New York Times glorifying Stalin... http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=700749

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, the country as a whole and the media of that time both did a very poor job of acknowledging the Holocaust's existence. It's a common fact.

 

It wouldn't have surprised me at that time that people wouldn't have believed one group of people would purposely try to exterminate another. It's a pretty disturbing fact to have to face.

 

We should have done a lot more to help stop the Holocaust, that's just the way it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The New York Times sucks as a news source?

 

Who knew?

 

Wow. Anyone truly can deny anything these days.

 

And of course we glorified Stalin! He was our ally at the time. Wow. I'm just, wow. In shock. I think you'd find most American Generals praising Stalin at that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Accord, two things.

 

1. You didnt post proof. You took someone else's conclusions and asserted it as proof. Moreover, you may have quotes of historians who state a failure on the part of the NYtimes to cover as much as it should have, which if fine as evidence(Im sure the NYTimes, like other American institutions, isnt proud of its negligence.) But where is there evidence that the NYtimes actually suppressed stories on the Holocaust?

 

In addition, you can't just show proof that the NYtimes, like the rest of our country, screwed up by not being assertive enough against what was going on. I want proof that they actually suppressed stories about it. I want you to show me that they were worse than the rest of the country.

 

Look at it this way: Foxnews isnt covering the Sudan crisis that much. But how does that mean they are suppressing stories on the Sudan crisis?

 

So again, give me proof that the Times suppressed stories on the Holocaust.

 

2. I didnt read anything in that link you provided of the NYtimes having a history of glorifying Stalin. Can you cut and paste that proof?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Holocaust did not get reported during the Second World War because there was no way for media outlets here to know that it existed. Even the military folks who thought it could exist didn't think it was possible to have killing factories like what had been rumored in Nazi Poland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Holocaust did not get reported during the Second World War because there was no way for media outlets here to know that it existed. Even the military folks who thought it could exist didn't think it was possible to have killing factories like what had been rumored in Nazi Poland.

 

 

I would agree with you, except it's well known FDR knew of the existence of Auschwitz, yet did nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Holocaust did not get reported during the Second World War because there was no way for media outlets here to know that it existed. Even the military folks who thought it could exist didn't think it was possible to have killing factories like what had been rumored in Nazi Poland.

 

 

I would agree with you, except it's well known FDR knew of the existence of Auschwitz, yet did nothing.

 

He did bring the country to war and I am pretty sure he didnt know what was being done within Auschwitz.

 

Plus, isnt this topic about the above article ????? When it the holocaust become part of the above article folks?

 

Also the poster was right, the "icon name" should not be allowed to post for "Stephen Tyrone Colbert" as that wasnt supposed to be allowed in here. But that is for a mod to handle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if Colbert IS a mod!?

 

Besides, who cares? Is the article any less legitimate than something a real poster posts? I mean, it's generated discussion aside from the bitching about it being a character.

 

No different than 99% of tealmarlin's article posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C.I.A. Closes Unit Focused on Capture of bin Laden

 

By MARK MAZZETTI

Published: July 4, 2006

 

WASHINGTON, July 3 ? The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday.

Skip to next paragraph

Threats & Responses

Go to Complete Coverage ?

Readers? Opinions

Forum: National Security

 

The unit, known as Alec Station, was disbanded late last year and its analysts reassigned within the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center, the officials said.

 

The decision is a milestone for the agency, which formed the unit before Osama bin Laden became a household name and bolstered its ranks after the Sept. 11 attacks, when President Bush pledged to bring Mr. bin Laden to justice "dead or alive."

 

The realignment reflects a view that Al Qaeda is no longer as hierarchical as it once was, intelligence officials said, and a growing concern about Qaeda-inspired groups that have begun carrying out attacks independent of Mr. bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

 

Agency officials said that tracking Mr. bin Laden and his deputies remained a high priority, and that the decision to disband the unit was not a sign that the effort had slackened. Instead, the officials said, it reflects a belief that the agency can better deal with high-level threats by focusing on regional trends rather than on specific organizations or individuals.

 

"The efforts to find Osama bin Laden are as strong as ever," said Jennifer Millerwise Dyck, a C.I.A. spokeswoman. "This is an agile agency, and the decision was made to ensure greater reach and focus."

 

The decision to close the unit was first reported Monday by National Public Radio.

 

Michael Scheuer, a former senior C.I.A. official who was the first head of the unit, said the move reflected a view within the agency that Mr. bin Laden was no longer the threat he once was.

 

Mr. Scheuer said that view was mistaken.

 

"This will clearly denigrate our operations against Al Qaeda," he said. "These days at the agency, bin Laden and Al Qaeda appear to be treated merely as first among equals."

 

In recent years, the war in Iraq has stretched the resources of the intelligence agencies and the Pentagon, generating new priorities for American officials. For instance, much of the military's counterterrorism units, like the Army's Delta Force, had been redirected from the hunt for Mr. bin Laden to the search for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed last month in Iraq.

 

An intelligence official who was granted anonymity to discuss classified information said the closing of the bin Laden unit reflected a greater grasp of the organization. "Our understanding of Al Qaeda has greatly evolved from where it was in the late 1990's," the official said, but added, "There are still people who wake up every day with the job of trying to find bin Laden."

 

Established in 1996, when Mr. bin Laden's calls for global jihad were a source of increasing concern for officials in Washington, Alec Station operated in a similar fashion to that of other agency stations around the globe.

 

The two dozen staff members who worked at the station, which was named after Mr. Scheuer's son and was housed in leased offices near agency headquarters in northern Virginia, issued regular cables to the agency about Mr. bin Laden's growing abilities and his desire to strike American targets throughout the world.

 

In his book "Ghost Wars," which chronicles the agency's efforts to hunt Mr. bin Laden in the years before the Sept. 11 attacks, Steve Coll wrote that some inside the agency likened Alec Station to a cult that became obsessed with Al Qaeda.

 

"The bin Laden unit's analysts were so intense about their work that they made some of their C.I.A. colleagues uncomfortable," Mr. Coll wrote. Members of Alec Station "called themselves 'the Manson Family' because they had acquired a reputation for crazed alarmism about the rising Al Qaeda threat."

 

Intelligence officials said Alec Station was disbanded after Robert Grenier, who until February was in charge of the Counterterrorist Center, decided the agency needed to reorganize to better address constant changes in terrorist organizations.

 

Our Commander and Our leader has shown us this Independence Day he is making progess on the War on Terror front.

 

No longer do we need to focus on small fish like Usama Bin Laden but now we are going after the head honchos the guys who are driving this War on Terror and the War on the War on Terror. People like the NYT. You see the NYT has brainwashed nearly half of this country with their far left propoganda, convincing well meaning people to believe Usama Bin Laden had something to do with 9/11 while convincing them Iraq was innocent on all accounts. Well now King Bush has made it clear NO MORE.

 

And I for one applaud him for his progess and our progess. God Bless America this Fourth of July. And by America I mean all those who support our President the rest of you are nothing but Bennidict Arnolds.

 

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. ... It's not our priority."- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C.I.A. Closes Unit Focused on Capture of bin Laden

 

By MARK MAZZETTI

Published: July 4, 2006

 

WASHINGTON, July 3 ? The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday.

Skip to next paragraph

Threats & Responses

Go to Complete Coverage ?

Readers? Opinions

Forum: National Security

 

The unit, known as Alec Station, was disbanded late last year and its analysts reassigned within the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center, the officials said.

 

The decision is a milestone for the agency, which formed the unit before Osama bin Laden became a household name and bolstered its ranks after the Sept. 11 attacks, when President Bush pledged to bring Mr. bin Laden to justice "dead or alive."

 

The realignment reflects a view that Al Qaeda is no longer as hierarchical as it once was, intelligence officials said, and a growing concern about Qaeda-inspired groups that have begun carrying out attacks independent of Mr. bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

 

Agency officials said that tracking Mr. bin Laden and his deputies remained a high priority, and that the decision to disband the unit was not a sign that the effort had slackened. Instead, the officials said, it reflects a belief that the agency can better deal with high-level threats by focusing on regional trends rather than on specific organizations or individuals.

 

"The efforts to find Osama bin Laden are as strong as ever," said Jennifer Millerwise Dyck, a C.I.A. spokeswoman. "This is an agile agency, and the decision was made to ensure greater reach and focus."

 

The decision to close the unit was first reported Monday by National Public Radio.

 

Michael Scheuer, a former senior C.I.A. official who was the first head of the unit, said the move reflected a view within the agency that Mr. bin Laden was no longer the threat he once was.

 

Mr. Scheuer said that view was mistaken.

 

"This will clearly denigrate our operations against Al Qaeda," he said. "These days at the agency, bin Laden and Al Qaeda appear to be treated merely as first among equals."

 

In recent years, the war in Iraq has stretched the resources of the intelligence agencies and the Pentagon, generating new priorities for American officials. For instance, much of the military's counterterrorism units, like the Army's Delta Force, had been redirected from the hunt for Mr. bin Laden to the search for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed last month in Iraq.

 

An intelligence official who was granted anonymity to discuss classified information said the closing of the bin Laden unit reflected a greater grasp of the organization. "Our understanding of Al Qaeda has greatly evolved from where it was in the late 1990's," the official said, but added, "There are still people who wake up every day with the job of trying to find bin Laden."

 

Established in 1996, when Mr. bin Laden's calls for global jihad were a source of increasing concern for officials in Washington, Alec Station operated in a similar fashion to that of other agency stations around the globe.

 

The two dozen staff members who worked at the station, which was named after Mr. Scheuer's son and was housed in leased offices near agency headquarters in northern Virginia, issued regular cables to the agency about Mr. bin Laden's growing abilities and his desire to strike American targets throughout the world.

 

In his book "Ghost Wars," which chronicles the agency's efforts to hunt Mr. bin Laden in the years before the Sept. 11 attacks, Steve Coll wrote that some inside the agency likened Alec Station to a cult that became obsessed with Al Qaeda.

 

"The bin Laden unit's analysts were so intense about their work that they made some of their C.I.A. colleagues uncomfortable," Mr. Coll wrote. Members of Alec Station "called themselves 'the Manson Family' because they had acquired a reputation for crazed alarmism about the rising Al Qaeda threat."

 

Intelligence officials said Alec Station was disbanded after Robert Grenier, who until February was in charge of the Counterterrorist Center, decided the agency needed to reorganize to better address constant changes in terrorist organizations.

 

Our Commander and Our leader has shown us this Independence Day he is making progess on the War on Terror front.

 

No longer do we need to focus on small fish like Usama Bin Laden but now we are going after the head honchos the guys who are driving this War on Terror and the War on the War on Terror. People like the NYT. You see the NYT has brainwashed nearly half of this country with their far left propoganda, convincing well meaning people to believe Usama Bin Laden had something to do with 9/11 while convincing them Iraq was innocent on all accounts. Well now King Bush has made it clear NO MORE.

 

And I for one applaud him for his progess and our progess. God Bless America this Fourth of July. And by America I mean all those who support our President the rest of you are nothing but Bennidict Arnolds.

 

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. ... It's not our priority."- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

Source of the quote? Where was this said, and to whom? I searched Google and the only place I was able to find the quotes was on windbag liberal blogs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C.I.A. Closes Unit Focused on Capture of bin Laden

 

By MARK MAZZETTI

Published: July 4, 2006

 

WASHINGTON, July 3 ? The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday.

Skip to next paragraph

Threats & Responses

Go to Complete Coverage ?

Readers? Opinions

Forum: National Security

 

The unit, known as Alec Station, was disbanded late last year and its analysts reassigned within the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center, the officials said.

 

The decision is a milestone for the agency, which formed the unit before Osama bin Laden became a household name and bolstered its ranks after the Sept. 11 attacks, when President Bush pledged to bring Mr. bin Laden to justice "dead or alive."

 

The realignment reflects a view that Al Qaeda is no longer as hierarchical as it once was, intelligence officials said, and a growing concern about Qaeda-inspired groups that have begun carrying out attacks independent of Mr. bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

 

Agency officials said that tracking Mr. bin Laden and his deputies remained a high priority, and that the decision to disband the unit was not a sign that the effort had slackened. Instead, the officials said, it reflects a belief that the agency can better deal with high-level threats by focusing on regional trends rather than on specific organizations or individuals.

 

"The efforts to find Osama bin Laden are as strong as ever," said Jennifer Millerwise Dyck, a C.I.A. spokeswoman. "This is an agile agency, and the decision was made to ensure greater reach and focus."

 

The decision to close the unit was first reported Monday by National Public Radio.

 

Michael Scheuer, a former senior C.I.A. official who was the first head of the unit, said the move reflected a view within the agency that Mr. bin Laden was no longer the threat he once was.

 

Mr. Scheuer said that view was mistaken.

 

"This will clearly denigrate our operations against Al Qaeda," he said. "These days at the agency, bin Laden and Al Qaeda appear to be treated merely as first among equals."

 

In recent years, the war in Iraq has stretched the resources of the intelligence agencies and the Pentagon, generating new priorities for American officials. For instance, much of the military's counterterrorism units, like the Army's Delta Force, had been redirected from the hunt for Mr. bin Laden to the search for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed last month in Iraq.

 

An intelligence official who was granted anonymity to discuss classified information said the closing of the bin Laden unit reflected a greater grasp of the organization. "Our understanding of Al Qaeda has greatly evolved from where it was in the late 1990's," the official said, but added, "There are still people who wake up every day with the job of trying to find bin Laden."

 

Established in 1996, when Mr. bin Laden's calls for global jihad were a source of increasing concern for officials in Washington, Alec Station operated in a similar fashion to that of other agency stations around the globe.

 

The two dozen staff members who worked at the station, which was named after Mr. Scheuer's son and was housed in leased offices near agency headquarters in northern Virginia, issued regular cables to the agency about Mr. bin Laden's growing abilities and his desire to strike American targets throughout the world.

 

In his book "Ghost Wars," which chronicles the agency's efforts to hunt Mr. bin Laden in the years before the Sept. 11 attacks, Steve Coll wrote that some inside the agency likened Alec Station to a cult that became obsessed with Al Qaeda.

 

"The bin Laden unit's analysts were so intense about their work that they made some of their C.I.A. colleagues uncomfortable," Mr. Coll wrote. Members of Alec Station "called themselves 'the Manson Family' because they had acquired a reputation for crazed alarmism about the rising Al Qaeda threat."

 

Intelligence officials said Alec Station was disbanded after Robert Grenier, who until February was in charge of the Counterterrorist Center, decided the agency needed to reorganize to better address constant changes in terrorist organizations.

 

Our Commander and Our leader has shown us this Independence Day he is making progess on the War on Terror front.

 

No longer do we need to focus on small fish like Usama Bin Laden but now we are going after the head honchos the guys who are driving this War on Terror and the War on the War on Terror. People like the NYT. You see the NYT has brainwashed nearly half of this country with their far left propoganda, convincing well meaning people to believe Usama Bin Laden had something to do with 9/11 while convincing them Iraq was innocent on all accounts. Well now King Bush has made it clear NO MORE.

 

And I for one applaud him for his progess and our progess. God Bless America this Fourth of July. And by America I mean all those who support our President the rest of you are nothing but Bennidict Arnolds.

 

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. ... It's not our priority."- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

Source of the quote? Where was this said, and to whom? I searched Google and the only place I was able to find the quotes was on windbag liberal blogs.

 

 

Well, if they haven't gotten him by now...that tells me something.

 

Six Gun Ronnie managed to bomb Qaddafi's place, they found Saddam in a underground spot.

 

Bin Laden is on dialysis...you mean all our spy satellites can't DETECT one of those machines?

 

And here's another quote for you...

 

"We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11 attacks." George W. Bush, September 18, 2003

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C.I.A. Closes Unit Focused on Capture of bin Laden

 

By MARK MAZZETTI

Published: July 4, 2006

 

WASHINGTON, July 3 ? The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday.

Skip to next paragraph

Threats & Responses

Go to Complete Coverage ?

Readers? Opinions

Forum: National Security

 

The unit, known as Alec Station, was disbanded late last year and its analysts reassigned within the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center, the officials said.

 

The decision is a milestone for the agency, which formed the unit before Osama bin Laden became a household name and bolstered its ranks after the Sept. 11 attacks, when President Bush pledged to bring Mr. bin Laden to justice "dead or alive."

 

The realignment reflects a view that Al Qaeda is no longer as hierarchical as it once was, intelligence officials said, and a growing concern about Qaeda-inspired groups that have begun carrying out attacks independent of Mr. bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

 

Agency officials said that tracking Mr. bin Laden and his deputies remained a high priority, and that the decision to disband the unit was not a sign that the effort had slackened. Instead, the officials said, it reflects a belief that the agency can better deal with high-level threats by focusing on regional trends rather than on specific organizations or individuals.

 

"The efforts to find Osama bin Laden are as strong as ever," said Jennifer Millerwise Dyck, a C.I.A. spokeswoman. "This is an agile agency, and the decision was made to ensure greater reach and focus."

 

The decision to close the unit was first reported Monday by National Public Radio.

 

Michael Scheuer, a former senior C.I.A. official who was the first head of the unit, said the move reflected a view within the agency that Mr. bin Laden was no longer the threat he once was.

 

Mr. Scheuer said that view was mistaken.

 

"This will clearly denigrate our operations against Al Qaeda," he said. "These days at the agency, bin Laden and Al Qaeda appear to be treated merely as first among equals."

 

In recent years, the war in Iraq has stretched the resources of the intelligence agencies and the Pentagon, generating new priorities for American officials. For instance, much of the military's counterterrorism units, like the Army's Delta Force, had been redirected from the hunt for Mr. bin Laden to the search for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed last month in Iraq.

 

An intelligence official who was granted anonymity to discuss classified information said the closing of the bin Laden unit reflected a greater grasp of the organization. "Our understanding of Al Qaeda has greatly evolved from where it was in the late 1990's," the official said, but added, "There are still people who wake up every day with the job of trying to find bin Laden."

 

Established in 1996, when Mr. bin Laden's calls for global jihad were a source of increasing concern for officials in Washington, Alec Station operated in a similar fashion to that of other agency stations around the globe.

 

The two dozen staff members who worked at the station, which was named after Mr. Scheuer's son and was housed in leased offices near agency headquarters in northern Virginia, issued regular cables to the agency about Mr. bin Laden's growing abilities and his desire to strike American targets throughout the world.

 

In his book "Ghost Wars," which chronicles the agency's efforts to hunt Mr. bin Laden in the years before the Sept. 11 attacks, Steve Coll wrote that some inside the agency likened Alec Station to a cult that became obsessed with Al Qaeda.

 

"The bin Laden unit's analysts were so intense about their work that they made some of their C.I.A. colleagues uncomfortable," Mr. Coll wrote. Members of Alec Station "called themselves 'the Manson Family' because they had acquired a reputation for crazed alarmism about the rising Al Qaeda threat."

 

Intelligence officials said Alec Station was disbanded after Robert Grenier, who until February was in charge of the Counterterrorist Center, decided the agency needed to reorganize to better address constant changes in terrorist organizations.

 

Our Commander and Our leader has shown us this Independence Day he is making progess on the War on Terror front.

 

No longer do we need to focus on small fish like Usama Bin Laden but now we are going after the head honchos the guys who are driving this War on Terror and the War on the War on Terror. People like the NYT. You see the NYT has brainwashed nearly half of this country with their far left propoganda, convincing well meaning people to believe Usama Bin Laden had something to do with 9/11 while convincing them Iraq was innocent on all accounts. Well now King Bush has made it clear NO MORE.

 

And I for one applaud him for his progess and our progess. God Bless America this Fourth of July. And by America I mean all those who support our President the rest of you are nothing but Bennidict Arnolds.

 

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. ... It's not our priority."- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

Source of the quote? Where was this said, and to whom? I searched Google and the only place I was able to find the quotes was on windbag liberal blogs.

 

 

Well, if they haven't gotten him by now...that tells me something.

 

Six Gun Ronnie managed to bomb Qaddafi's place, they found Saddam in a underground spot.

 

Bin Laden is on dialysis...you mean all our spy satellites can't DETECT one of those machines?

 

And here's another quote for you...

 

"We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11 attacks." George W. Bush, September 18, 2003

Why did you quote me, and then COMPLETELY ignore what I asked?

 

What is the source of that above quote, where is it from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the actual quote:

 

And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him.

 

Here is the proper context it was said -not as crass as the above misquote makes it out to be, but still not necessarily a good position:

 

 

Q Mr. President, in your speeches now you rarely talk or mention Osama bin Laden. Why is that? Also, can you tell the American people if you have any more information, if you know if he is dead or alive? Final part -- deep in your heart, don't you truly believe that until you find out if he is dead or alive, you won't really eliminate the threat of --

 

THE PRESIDENT: Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's alive at all. Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not; we haven't heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person is -- really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission.

 

Terror is bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person who's now been marginalized. His network, his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match. He is -- as I mentioned in my speech, I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death and he, himself, tries to hide -- if, in fact, he's hiding at all.

 

So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well-supplied; that the strategy is clear; that the coalition is strong; that when we find enemy bunched up like we did in Shahikot Mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did.

 

And there will be other battles in Afghanistan. There's going to be other struggles like Shahikot, and I'm just as confident about the outcome of those future battles as I was about Shahikot, where our soldiers are performing brilliantly. We're tough, we're strong, they're well-equipped. We have a good strategy. We are showing the world we know how to fight a guerrilla war with conventional means.

 

Q But don't you believe that the threat that bin Laden posed won't truly be eliminated until he is found either dead or alive?

 

THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.

 

But once we set out the policy and started executing the plan, he became -- we shoved him out more and more on the margins. He has no place to train his al Qaeda killers anymore. And if we -- excuse me for a minute -- and if we find a training camp, we'll take care of it. Either we will or our friends will. That's one of the things -- part of the new phase that's becoming apparent to the American people is that we're working closely with other governments to deny sanctuary, or training, or a place to hide, or a place to raise money.

 

And we've got more work to do. See, that's the thing the American people have got to understand, that we've only been at this six months. This is going to be a long struggle. I keep saying that; I don't know whether you all believe me or not. But time will show you that it's going to take a long time to achieve this objective. And I can assure you, I am not going to blink. And I'm not going to get tired. Because I know what is at stake. And history has called us to action, and I am going to seize this moment for the good of the world, for peace in the world and for freedom.

 

 

 

 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20020313-8.html

 

And please dont make any comments about the left and using convenient quotes. Bush might not be in office if he didnt misquote people. How many people still misquote Gore on the internet comment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Accord, two things.

 

1. You didnt post proof. You took someone else's conclusions and asserted it as proof. Moreover, you may have quotes of historians who state a failure on the part of the NYtimes to cover as much as it should have, which if fine as evidence(Im sure the NYTimes, like other American institutions, isnt proud of its negligence.) But where is there evidence that the NYtimes actually suppressed stories on the Holocaust?

 

In addition, you can't just show proof that the NYtimes, like the rest of our country, screwed up by not being assertive enough against what was going on. I want proof that they actually suppressed stories about it. I want you to show me that they were worse than the rest of the country.

 

Look at it this way: Foxnews isnt covering the Sudan crisis that much. But how does that mean they are suppressing stories on the Sudan crisis?

 

So again, give me proof that the Times suppressed stories on the Holocaust.

 

2. I didnt read anything in that link you provided of the NYtimes having a history of glorifying Stalin. Can you cut and paste that proof?

 

Read the book "Buried by The Times: The Holocaust and America?s Most Important Newspaper."

 

What did The New York Times report about the Holocaust and how did its coverage affect America?s response to the Nazi genocide?

 

Throughout World War II, the American media published and broadcast timely, detailed, and accurate accounts of what was happening to the Jews in Europe. The New York Times alone printed nearly 1,200 articles about what we have now come to call the Holocaust, about one every other day.

 

The articles in the Times and elsewhere described the propagation of anti-Semitic laws in German allied countries; death from disease and starvation of hundreds of thousands in ghettos and labor camps; mass executions in Nazi-occupied Russia; and mass gassings in Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Maidanek. The articles also indicated that these were not isolated incidents, but part of a systematic campaign to kill all the Jews in Europe.

 

And yet, at the end of the war and for decades afterward, Americans claimed they did not know about the Holocaust as it was happening. How was it possible for so much information to be available in the mass media and yet simultaneously for the public to be ignorant?

 

The reason is that the American media in general and the New York Times in particular never treated the Holocaust as an important news story. From the start of the war in Europe to its end nearly six years later, the story of the Holocaust made the Times front page only 26 times out of 24,000 front-page stories, and most of those stories referred to the victims as ?refugees? or ?persecuted minorities.? In only six of those stories were Jews identified on page one as the primary victims.

 

Nor did the story lead the paper, appearing in the right-hand column reserved for the day?s most important news ? not even when the concentration camps were liberated at the end of the war. In addition, the Times intermittently and timidly editorialized about the extermination of the Jews, and the paper rarely highlighted it in either the Week in Review or the magazine section.

 

What kept American journalists from recognizing the significance of the systematic murder of six million people? Worldwide carnage on an unprecedented scale helped obscure the Jews? plight. There was also skepticism bred by fake atrocity reports during the previous world war. The Roosevelt Administration?s determination to downplay the news also contributed to the subdued coverage. But the media had enough credible information to treat the news of the extermination of the Jews as important. And the New York Times played a critical role in why it didn?t.

 

For no American news organization was better positioned to highlight the Holocaust than the Times, and no American news organization so influenced public discourse by its failure to do so.

 

Because of its longtime commitment to international affairs, its willingness to sacrifice advertising rather than articles in the face of a newsprint crunch, and its substantial Jewish readership, the Times was able to obtain and publish more news about what was happening to the Jews than other mainstream newspapers. In addition, Jews of German descent owned the Times and thus knew the fate of family members, some of whom they sponsored to immigrate to the States, some of whom they didn?t. The family?s deep, if not always amicable involvement with the American Jewish community also led the Times to learn much about the Jews? situation.

 

So the New York Times was less likely than other news organizations to miss what was happening to the Jews. But it was also more likely to dismiss its significance. Fearful of accusations of special pleading or dual loyalties, the newspaper hesitated to highlight the news. In addition, the newspaper?s Jewish publisher believed that Jews were neither a racial nor ethnic group, and therefore should not be identified as Jews for any other than religious reasons. He also believed that Americans would only want to help Jews if their cause was melded with that of other persecuted people. He therefore ensured that his paper universalized the Nazis? victims in editorials and on the front page.

 

The result: The New York Times was in touch with European Jews? suffering, which accounts for its 1,000-plus stories on the Final Solution?s steady progress. Yet, it deliberately de-emphasized the Holocaust news, reporting it in isolated, inside stories. The few hundred words about the Nazi genocide the Times published every couple days were hard to find amidst a million other words in the newspaper. Times readers could legitimately have claimed not to have known, or at least not to have understood, what was happening to the Jews.

 

The Times?s judgment that the murder of millions of Jews was a relatively unimportant story also reverberated among other journalists trying to assess the news, among Jewish groups trying to arouse public opinion, and among government leaders trying to decide on an American response. It partly explains the general apathy and inaction that greeted the news of the Holocaust.

 

We do not know how many Jews might have been saved had the Times acted differently. We do know, however, that the possibilities for rescue were never truly tested.

 

It is also clear that had the Times and other news organizations decided that the extermination of the Jews was important, the paper could have and should have highlighted it, regardless of whether it would have saved lives. The press alone could not have altered the currents of public discourse that swamped the news of the Jews? destruction, and certainly a single newspaper by itself could not have accomplished that. Still, the Times had a moral and professional obligation to do more than be swept along with the tide.

 

http://hnn.us/articles/10903.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but this was attested durring the 40s, 50s towards that paper and it's staff. Still not much can be done or should be done now over it.

 

Except papers should cover more closely when countries lock up their own citizens without the right to a trial just for religious reasons.

 

I am sure you will agree accord.

 

you know like we are doing right now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. I asked for evidence that the NYT affirmitively suppresed stories about the holocaust accord. I wanted proof that the NYT "has a history of suppressing stories about the Holocaust during WW2.." Most of that article just talks about the NYT being negligent which I pretty much already proved was not relevant to your outlandish claim. There is one blurb that argues that the NYT was suppresive and its fails for its enormous speculation and theory. Sorry, but thats not evidence. I didnt ask for you to repeat someone else's speculation.

 

Here is the blurb:

 

So the New York Times was less likely than other news organizations to miss what was happening to the Jews. But it was also more likely to dismiss its significance. Fearful of accusations of special pleading or dual loyalties, the newspaper hesitated to highlight the news. In addition, the newspaper's Jewish publisher believed that Jews were neither a racial nor ethnic group, and therefore should not be identified as Jews for any other than religious reasons. He also believed that Americans would only want to help Jews if their cause was melded with that of other persecuted people. He therefore ensured that his paper universalized the Nazis' victims in editorials and on the front page.

 

First off, its not evidence. It doesnt prove your ridiculous assertion that the NYT "has a history of suppressing stories about the Holocaust during WW2..." It's just the writer speculating like crazy. Where is evidence that they were fearful of accusations and so decided not to publish stories as a result? Where is the evidence that they actually knew stuff, not that they were Jews from Germany.

 

Yet even if we were to assume that these fanciful claims of fact were true, here is why they dont even back up his conclusion, and moreso your ridiculous conclusion extended from this.

 

-He claims the Jewish publisher didnt think Jews were a racial group. So somehow it follows from this that he wanted to suppress the holocaust, as you claimed as historical fact? How?

-He claims that the NYT publisher mixed the jewish cause with other groups, and somehow this means he was suppresing the holocaust. So effectively he is claiming, and you too, that the Jewish publisher wanted to screw Jews by making the decision that he thought would help Jews because he thought it would make Americans notice the holocaust. You never cease to amaze me accord.

 

If I post to a book that says Bush's close loyalties to the Saudi prince means that he really enjoys and wants high gas prices, you would call it historical fact. Not an argument. But historical fact.

 

2. Also you didnt answer question #2. You asked me two questions and I responded. I even responded to your demand for further response. Maybe you can answer my second question?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...