America's hidden heroes

CIA operatives set the table for Osama bin Laden's takedown

  • Follow Editorials

A few years ago, they were made to feel like criminals. Today it's clear they were anonymous, invisible heroes.

But no one will ever throw them a parade.

The CIA agents and others who had the dirty job of coercing invaluable intelligence information out of desperate, murderous terrorists were actually threatened with criminal prosecution in the early days of the current administration. Today, that administration is understandably basking in the glory of the takedown of Osama bin Laden.

Is there a "thank you" card that covers such a thing?

There's a debate raging inside the Beltway over whether "enhanced" interrogation techniques such as waterboarding led to the identity of the courier who ultimately left a trail leading to bin Laden.

Regardless, there's no doubt that a much-maligned intelligence community is responsible for finally putting an end to the threat from the world's most infamous terrorist and mass murderer.

President George W. Bush ended up being hated and abused by the left -- and for what? Trying too hard to protect the country.

In many ways, the nameless agents assigned to protect us by ferreting out information from our enemies suffered the same fate. An ungrateful and amnesic liberal horde wanted to make an example of these agents -- even though they had acted on the highest authorities of the government and legal advice therein.

Thank God we got to bin Laden first.

Comments (30) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
LauraE
0
Points
LauraE 05/07/11 - 01:49 am
0
0
Let me clear up a

Let me clear up a misunderstanding with you guys. We liberals have a very high respect for our men and women in the military and special forces. Many of us come from military families. We realize that the people within those forces take orders (indirectly) from the president. Whatever dirty work they are called to do, most of them are doing their jobs to the best of their ability. Our displeasures over the chain of events was not directed at them, but at the Commander in Chief. And we did give President Bush credit when it was due. If you recall, shortly after 9/11 his approval rate was nearly 90%. Yet when Bush left office in January 2009, his approval rating was only about 22%. So that means at least half of republicans disapproved of him as well.
And maybe you felt safe when Bush was in control, but a lot of us sure didn't. Maybe if he actually caught and/or killed Bin Laden instead of blaming Saddam Hussein for 9/11, opinions might have been changed. But that's all history now.

carcraft
25866
Points
carcraft 05/07/11 - 06:40 am
0
0
LauraE-The CIA is civilian it

LauraE-The CIA is civilian it isn't military--Have you ever heard of the John Adams project by the ACLU? That was where the ACLU tried to identify CIA operatives by getting pictures of CIA operative with names attached and seeing if GITMO dtainees could indentify them as interrogators? Nice huh? The left and the press went after Bush about Valarie Phlame but you probably never heard of the John Adams project. Bush was actively seeking Ben Laden and much of the information that lead to his location was under Bush. Now lets go back a few years before Bush when Ben Laden Bombed two US embassies in Africa, the Navy Ship USS Cole, Kobar Towers and the World Trade Center the first time. If Clinton had zipped his pants and taken out Ben Laden instead of playing hide the cigar with Monica 9-11 might not have happened!

carcraft
25866
Points
carcraft 05/07/11 - 06:55 am
0
0
LauraE-here is a comment from

LauraE-here is a comment from a new paper article on the CIA and prosecution them-In the New York Times editorial on Sunday, the paper lashed Obama, demanding a "commitment to accountability." The same editorial called for the impeachment of federal appeals court judge Jay Bybee, former assistant U.S. attorney general and author of the torture memos:. Here is another left wing nut that wanted Obama to go after the CIA-David Cole, a professor at Georgetown University Law Centre, and the author of Justice at War: The Men and Ideas That Shaped America's 'War on Terror', was forthright in his criticism of the president's decision not to prosecute, reports the Scotsman:

"Obama's refusal to hold accountable those responsible for the wrongs so evident from the memos is unacceptable. A child would recognise these tactics as cruel and inhumane." In short there was attacks by the left on the CIA and the left wanted them prosecuted. One other thing Obama did right was refuse to conduct criminal invstigations against CIA agents the left so wanted!

fred1217
4
Points
fred1217 05/07/11 - 08:17 am
0
0
Good points Laura, plus the

Good points Laura, plus the editorial leaves out the "small" fact that MANY people were a little upset about George W. Bush/Dick Cheney manipulating intelligence information to invade Iraq and starting an unnecessary war that cost billions (maybe a trillion) of dollars, plus the lives of over 4,000 service men and women and tens of thousands of Iraqis. Bush played a large part in making the CIA look bad for "cherry picking" intelligence information that the CIA told him was questionable. It was not just the "Left" that hated Bush/Cheney for doing that, but most of the world. Iraq was not an imminent threat to our country. If we had not wasted time and resources in Iraq, Osama Bin Laden (the real terrorist) could have been "Smoked out" by the Bush Administration. I hope they saved that giant "Mission Accomplished" banner that Bush used on the aircraft carrier in 2003, President Obama is going to need it soon. Why is the ACES trying to "repair" the Bush Legacy anyway? That's Mission Impossible. Move on to something new, if you watched the Republican Debate the other night, it's rather obvious that you're going to have your hands full making one of those guys or Donald Trump look good for 2012. Good luck with that.

justthefacts
21875
Points
justthefacts 05/07/11 - 08:24 am
0
0
Yet another small act. "The

Yet another small act. "The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement of policy calling for regime change in Iraq.[1][2] It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton".

fred1217
4
Points
fred1217 05/07/11 - 08:45 am
0
0
Justthefacts, which President

Justthefacts, which President ordered American Troops to invade Iraq? I'll give you a hint. His Secretary of State held up a small bottle of "Antrax" at the UN to make a case for war. You can't change that even if you go back to Acts passed by George Washington.

Riverman1
83991
Points
Riverman1 05/07/11 - 08:56 am
0
0
It was a good move by Obama

It was a good move by Obama to get Osama. It's also well known by now that intelligence gained during the Bush administration using enhanced interrogation techniques led to the capture of Osama.

Forgive us conservatives for being gleeful about all this, but liberals called for the arrest of Bush and other officials for for the enhanced interrogations for a couple of years after Obama's election and the Democrats gaining control of Congress. It was said on MSNBC many times that Bush, Cheney and others should be brought up on charges. It now appears they are vindicated.

justthefacts
21875
Points
justthefacts 05/07/11 - 09:29 am
0
0
So fred, did a majority in

So fred, did a majority in both houses of Congress (Reps & Dems) vote in favor of the invasion? Did Bush do this without the support of all Democratic leaders? Do I have to provide quotes from Kerry, Edwards, both Clintons? Do you know that Bush had nothing to do with the "Mission Accomplished" sign and that it was meant for the sailors on the ship who had just returned from their "mission"? I suspect you know all this.

justthefacts
21875
Points
justthefacts 05/07/11 - 09:32 am
0
0
And fred, why did Clinton

And fred, why did Clinton sign the LAW stating that the goal of the US was regime change? What was the point? giggles?

carcraft
25866
Points
carcraft 05/07/11 - 09:34 am
0
0
Fred-yeh the same cherry

Fred-yeh the same cherry picked data that lead Bill Clinton, Hillery Clinton and multitudes of democrates to believe Sadam had WMD's.

fred1217
4
Points
fred1217 05/07/11 - 09:46 am
0
0
justthefacts, we'd like to

justthefacts, we'd like to change the regimes in China, Cuba, Iran, and countless other countries that doesn't mean we invade them if they don't pose a direct and imminent threat to the US and/or it allies. Especially against the advise of the CIA. I'm sure you could provide me the entire Fox Website, but that doesn't make the Iraq war any more "legit" than it was. The Mission Accomplished Banner after Bush flew onto the carrier wearing a flight jacket spoke for itself. Next thing you're going to tell me was that Bush didn't tell the Terrorists to "Bring it on" ... That wasn't his idea either probably his speech writers huh

Riverman1
83991
Points
Riverman1 05/07/11 - 09:53 am
0
0
Justthefacts asked, "Do I

Justthefacts asked, "Do I have to provide quotes from Kerry, Edwards, both Clintons?"

Exactly, says it all.

For more recent duplicity, Chris Matthews defending Obama's use of intelligence gained from enhanced interrogations used to kill Osama said presidents have to be cold blooded at times, but Cheney was a sadist because he liked it too much.

Is this crazy or what?

justthefacts
21875
Points
justthefacts 05/07/11 - 09:56 am
0
0
fred, noted. Please point out

fred, noted. Please point out all the LAWS that have been signed by Presidents stating that we are going to enforce a regime change in China, Cuba, etc. Thanks.
Suggestion, which I know is a waste of my time, read Decision Points. You don't have to buy it. Try to see another point of view. Also, try discussing a topic without resulting to smears once in a while. It's not that hard.

fred1217
4
Points
fred1217 05/07/11 - 10:04 am
0
0
Don't get me wrong, when it

Don't get me wrong, when it comes to going fishing, hunting and drinking beer, I would much prefer to be with George W. Bush and Sarah Palin, but when it comes to important matters like running the country, I think it needs to be in more capable hands. The capture of Osama Bin Laden required leadership and courage. We got it done. Why can't we leave it at that. Footnote: I would not want to go hunting with Cheney though. You guys have a good day.

carcraft
25866
Points
carcraft 05/07/11 - 10:06 am
0
0
Fred-Who signed the law and

Fred-Who signed the law and authorized Obama to bomb Lybia? If we are bombing Lybia why not Iran and Syria? Oh don't ask for logic or consistancy it is just bash Bush time!

Riverman1
83991
Points
Riverman1 05/07/11 - 10:13 am
0
0
Obama can drink beer with

Obama can drink beer with regular guys too. He had a few with the cop and Gates, his friend who was arrested, even if Obama did say the cops acted "stupidly." If I had been the cop, I'd have dared them to chug-a-lug a few with me and see who could stay upright.

TK3
562
Points
TK3 05/07/11 - 10:29 am
0
0
Bin Laden usefulness as a

Bin Laden usefulness as a enemy of the U.S. had finally come to a sorry end. The government of course had long term close observation/Intel, to say the least, on their "target' and what (little) any team would likely be up against going in, still Obama signed off on the decision to use Seals for a hit/assassination of Bin Laden and the few aides and relatives that had not long since left him and then tried to cover up that fact with lies and wild stories of 40 minutes of "heavy-resistance". Obama and the government would have been better off coming clean right off and not trying to cover up the ugly facts, but they never learn (another reason they hate "leaks"). The Powers that Be must have a replacement for Bin Laden in mind for the top of the chart to help instill the fear needed to allow oily Big Brother to overcome the Constitution with the Fascist style "Patriot Act" and so continue their march on.

fred1217
4
Points
fred1217 05/07/11 - 11:32 am
0
0
Riverman1(et al), I don't

Riverman1(et al), I don't know whether you guys pay taxes or not, but look at the IRS 1040 form that asks for income from illegal activities. "Income from illegal activities, such as money from dealing illegal drugs, must be included in your income on Form 1040, line 21, or on Schedule C or Schedule C-EZ (Form 1040) if from your self-employment activity." Does that justify Drug Dealing and other criminal activities with you guys also? After all, President Obama will be using your tax dollars from it. Same is true for using information obtained by using Torture (or enhanced interrogation methods as you call it). If it was that kind of information that assisted President Obama in "smoking out" Osama Bin Laden, I see no problem with him using already mined information, but that still doesn't make it right to torture. You can spin it anyway you want to, but I'm sure you wouldn't want another country torturing you or your kinfolk.

LauraE
0
Points
LauraE 05/07/11 - 11:55 am
0
0
Carcraft, When I said

Carcraft, When I said Military and special forces, I was referring to the CIA, FBI, etc. I know they aren't military. I also said that MOST of them are doing their jobs to the best of their ability. Those that aren't playing by the rules should be investigated and disciplined if they are found guilty-and not pardoned like Scooter Libby was. I don't care what your party affiliation is, if you've gone against the laws of our nation you have to face the consequences.

As far as the statement "If Clinton had zipped his pants and taken out Ben Laden instead of playing hide the cigar with Monica 9-11 might not have happened"
Two can play that game, you know. The CIA and former President Clinton told Bush that Al-Queda may try to hijack American Planes and fly them into prominant US landmarks. Maybe if Bush had taken more precautions, 9/11 wouldn't have happened. My point is that both Clinton and Bush dropped the ball, and trying to put the blame on one party is utterly ridiculous.

fred1217
4
Points
fred1217 05/07/11 - 01:06 pm
0
0
Laura, would that be

Laura, would that be considered second hand smoke? Why aren't these "Bush deserve all the credit guys" giving Bill Clinton any credit? After all he did tell those responsible for the USS Cole terrorist attack: "You will not find a safe harbor for we will find you and justice will prevail."

LauraE
0
Points
LauraE 05/07/11 - 01:08 pm
0
0
Good point, Fred. But what

Good point, Fred. But what I'm trying to get the right wingers to understand is that noone can take all the blame or praise. There's too many ifs ands or buts. I really try to be fair in my assessment of political events. I just wish more of the folks to the right of the political spectrum would try to do the same.

dani
12
Points
dani 05/07/11 - 02:21 pm
0
0
." The CIA and former

." The CIA and former President Clinton told Bush that Al-Queda may try to hijack American Planes and fly them into prominant US landmarks."

LauraE..This is my first time of hearing this...Can you give me a source?

Did you never wonder that Bill Clinton stayed mute on the issue when asked. He was well aware of the fact that he nor any of his crew thought it was a serious issue.

fred1217
4
Points
fred1217 05/07/11 - 03:05 pm
0
0
dani, it was widely

dani, it was widely disseminated that there was a "memo" containing this information that was turned over during the transition, if my memory serves me. I don't have a copy, but I do remember this being brought up initially after 9/11 during the "blame game" that followed. After a Presidential Election, there is a transition period where the outgoing administration provides such information to the incoming administration. I'm sure if you Google you can come up with all sorts of now declassified information on this subject. From what I know, the Clinton Administration did due diligence in making known what they knew of the threat and it was then up to the Bush Administration to take it from there. I remember listening to Rush during those days and the biggest issue was that Hillary had stolen furniture from the White House and all those “W” keys that were missing from the computer keyboards. Important stuff like that must have pushed Osama Bin Laden to the back burner I guess?

carcraft
25866
Points
carcraft 05/07/11 - 04:27 pm
0
0
Fred1217- Don't forget the

Fred1217- Don't forget the transiton period was shortened for Bush due to the Florida recounts etc..Then Clinton didn't take out Ben Laden when he had the chance..He wanted guarntees form the CIA

carcraft
25866
Points
carcraft 05/07/11 - 05:11 pm
0
0
About the memos- They are

About the memos- They are pretty non specific- but do spacificaly claim that "Items like hijacking of airliners etc CAN NOT BE CONFIRMED. emphasis mine. They state things like Al Quida is organized, will train for years to attack targets, there are probably cells in the US- it is urgent to deal with this- the sun will rise in the east and set in the west. Please read them. Two memos out of probably thousands-and not terribly specific! The Clinton administration (dispite the Cole, two embassies and the kobar tower + World Trade Center), had not established a way of dealing with Al Quaida. Also please note that Clinton had erected a wall between the FBI and the CIA that prevented them from trading and sharing information!

fred1217
4
Points
fred1217 05/07/11 - 05:18 pm
0
0
carcraft, I wasn't mentioning

carcraft, I wasn't mentioning the "memos" to blame Bush, I was only trying to respond to dani, who sounded surprised to hear that there was some forewarning. I always thought that 9/11 was just like December 7th and only blamed those that perpetrated the infamous acts. I believe 9/11 would have happened regardless of who was president. What happened in the months and almost eight years after 9/11 is a matter of history and as I asked in my first post today...Why is the ACES trying to "repair" the Bush Legacy anyway? The book is closed on the Bush Administration. Let's let history be the judge.

Riverman1
83991
Points
Riverman1 05/07/11 - 06:02 pm
0
0
So Fred, it appears Obama has

So Fred, it appears Obama has joined the "illegal" crowd by ordering the attack and killing of Osama in a soverign country, don't you think? It appears to me, history just judged Bush very favorably with the execution of Osama by Obama using info from Bush's CIA.

dani
12
Points
dani 05/07/11 - 06:48 pm
0
0
Just a bit from the Pakistani

Just a bit from the Pakistani (sp?) of his ordeal during the attack on Osama's compound:

Q>>Did the Pakistani army cordon off entire area & tell ppl to remain indoors 2 hrs before strike, as an article claims?

A>>I overheard a local saying the same thing near the compound, but can not confirm it. There was an unscheduled power outage half hour or so before the attack though.

dani
12
Points
dani 05/07/11 - 06:57 pm
0
0
Thank you carcraft 5:11. The

Thank you carcraft 5:11. The comment that said Bush was alerted by Clinton that hi-jacked aircraft would possibly fly into landmarks was the part that I questioned.

fred1217
4
Points
fred1217 05/07/11 - 06:57 pm
0
0
Riverman1, have you seen a

Riverman1, have you seen a copy of Pakistan's complaint to the United Nations that we violated their sovereignty? Pakistan is one of our strongest allies in the War on Terrorism. We'll get through this little misunderstanding. I heard one of the talking head say this week, with friends like Saudia Arabia, who needs Pakistan.

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs