by Mark Silva
With flags flying at half-staff outside CIA headquarters for seven members of the intelligence service killed in a suicide bomb-attack on a U.S. base in Afghanistan, President Barack Obama today addressed the staff by letter on "a sad occasion in the history of the CIA and our country.''
The attack this week inside a fortified Forward Operating Base Chapman in the Khost Province claimed the lives of seven CIA members and wounded several other Americans.
"These brave Americans were part of a long line of patriots who have made great sacrifices for their fellow citizens, and for our way of life,'' the vacationing president wrote in a letter to the employees of the intelligence agency today.
"In recent years,'' Obama wrote, "the CIA has been tested as never before. Since our country was attacked on September 11, 2001, you have served on the frontlines in directly confronting the dangers of the 21st century. Because of your service, plots have been disrupted, American lives have been saved, and our allies and partners have been more secure.''
The names of the victims of the suicide-bomber at the base in Afghanistan are not being released. As is the custom at CIA headquarters outside of Washington, a star will be placed for each of the fallen members on a Memorial Wall in the lobby of the Langley, Va., complex.
"Your triumphs and even your names may be unknown to your fellow Americans, but your service is deeply appreciated,'' Obama wrote today. "Indeed, I know firsthand the excellent quality of your work because I rely on it every day.''
The president's sentiment carried a certain irony in a week in which the White House revealed that "human and systemic errors'' in the nation's intelligence-gathering had occurred in the months before a Nigerian man trained in Yemen boarded a U.S. airliner bound for Detroit on Christmas Day and attempted to detonate an explosive hidden inside his pants.
The National Security Agency had intercepted communications in Yemen months beforehand about an unnamed Nigerian planning an attack, and the man's father had gone to the U.S. embassy in Nigeria to report that his son had become involved in radical activities.
In Afghanistan, the Obama administration is deploying 30,000 additional U.S. troops with a goal of training national security forces to protect their own nation against an insurgency. The victims of this week's suicide bomb-attack were at a forward-operating base in Khost Province.
"The men and women who gave their lives in Afghanistan did their duty with courage, honor and excellence, and we must draw strength from the example of their sacrifice,'' Obama told the CIA today in his letter.
"They will take their place on the Memorial Wall at Langley alongside so many other heroes who gave their lives on behalf of their country. And they will live on in the hearts of those who loved them, and in the freedom that they gave their lives to defend.''
Leon E. Panetta, Obama's appointee as CIA director, advised his agency today that "seven of their colleagues were killed and six others were injured'' in the terrorist bomb-attack Wednesday at the forward-operating base in Afghanistan.
"Those who fell yesterday were far from home and close to the enemy, doing the hard work that must be done to protect our country from terrorism," Panetta said in a message to employees. "We owe them our deepest gratitude, and we pledge to them and their families that we will never cease fighting for the cause to which they dedicated their lives--a safer America."
Because of "the sensitivity of their mission and other ongoing operations,'' Panetta said, their names were not being released. He ordered the flags at CIA headquarters flown at half staff.
Comments
I find this story to be so discomforting. This is the Central Intelligence Agency! They didnt know of an impending attack? Awful!!!
Posted by: John | December 31, 2009 3:01 PM
More numerous and widespread than the Roman Legions of olden times.
Would it be a quirk of fate if one of the fallen were the same one who took the statement from the father of pants-on-fire?
Well, it is quite a brain teaser:
Did Bush's war in EYE RACK---either Bush, either war---make America safer?
Or is there something fundamentally wrong with trying to be the new Roman Empire abroad while American society rots from within?
Posted by: ornery | December 31, 2009 4:46 PM
Another new low for ornery.
Ornery, let me explain a few things to you or at least ask some questions:
1. You mention the first Bush and apparently this is in reference to the Gulf War in 1991. How exactly is saving the Kuwaitee people from the invasive Iraqis and giving them their country back a Roman Empire moment? How many dozens of countries were involved in that?
2. Regarding our second incursion into Iraq, Hussein violated 18 UN resolutions. That is UN, not U.S. Hussein also repeatedly violated the terms of the cease fire from the first war. Hussein killed upwards of 1 million of his own people. There is now a democratically elected government in Iraq. Iraq is now a country largely at peace with its neighbors and within the world. Is that not a good thing?
3. We are in Afghanistan because the Taliban housed Al Qaeda and was in cahoots with Al Qaeda. The Taliban on its own killed and tortured largely women and children and any Afghan that didn't tow the Taliban line. Al Qaeda was responsible for the deaths of 3,000 Americans and an attack on this country. So by us kicking out the Taliban from power and weakening the Taliban, how is that a Roman Empire moment?
Would America have been safer without either war? The facts show the Middle East was better with IRaq out of Kuwait and weakened. The facts show the Middle East and world is better off with Hussein gone. The facts show that the world is a better place without the Taliban and Al Qaeda, though they still exist.
And now, for the past year, we have had the Obama administration apologize for our alleged past "sins," be kindler and gentler toward nutty Arab and Islamic folks, announce the closure of Gitmo (said to be a terrorist recruiter), and yet twice now in less then two months we've been attacked or nearly attacked. So how is playing nice with the Islamic kooks making the U.S. any safer?
Posted by: John D, still right, as usual | December 31, 2009 5:51 PM
These individuals were helping to fight an enemy with no flag and no uniform. They were attempting to help people with dubious allegiances and in turn were dependent on people with dubious allegiances to help them. By the nature of their work, you will never hear of their successes, only their failures.
Posted by: Patrick Willems | December 31, 2009 6:45 PM
The whole place is up for grabs, here and there
Posted by: JOHN C | December 31, 2009 6:49 PM
ornery do you even know anything about the Roman Empire? At what time in the Iraq war have we said we are here to stay, to take your land, and to tax your people. Can you show me where and when anybody in the Bush administration said that. I know you can't because it was never said you're just spouting your liberal claptrap. The fall of the Roman Empire was brought about by the lack of moral restraint and a water system in Rome made out of leadpipes. So the next time you try to post thinking your are being smart think again.
Posted by: Crooks_In_DC | December 31, 2009 6:56 PM
American society is rotting because of an entitlement attitude fed by Democrats, in order to make people dependent on government and the Dems.
Then there's Hollywood and its decadence...which is our biggest export. Maybe that's why fundamental Islam hates us. The morally vacant left spews garbage around the world in the name of entertainment.
If we are the Roman Empire, where are the spoils? Are getting free oil? Anything? NO.
More nonsense from the left.
Posted by: Free to Watch Whatever I Want | December 31, 2009 8:02 PM
The people in charge of the CIA base , let the suicide bomber inside the base and did not search him because as a show of good faith.
Posted by: ejhickey | December 31, 2009 8:25 PM
Check out THE SORROWS OF EMPIRE by that ornery ole Chalmers Johnson.
I thought at the time George I invaded Iraq: who cares whether the Emir of Kuwait gets to keep his solid gold bath tub or whether Saddam confiscates it and takes it off to one of his palaces?
Both were despots.
Emir of Kuwait could not eat oil and neither could Saddam.
The oil would enter the market and be sold regardless who controlled Kuwait.
So the war was really fought , 99 %, by one country--the good ole U.S.
Coalition Schmoalition. That's another pernicious myth.
It was for the benefit of Saudi royal family and Israel primarily. You can follow that whereever it leads.
One place it leads is the very cozy and lucrative relationship between the Bush Dynasty and the Saudi royals.
As to George II's invasion of Iraq, well, let me just refer you to the first great address of our Hyde Park State Senator....October 2002. Broadcast on WBEZ.
And sorry to disappoint : no teleprompTers in Daley Plaza that day.
A very great address indeed.
If you were listening and did not know who was speaking, your reaction was like the reaction to hearing the unidentified announcer on A Prairie Home Companion for the first time:
Who IS that guy?
Well, of course, now the world knows.
I can't improve on what he said there.
Yes, Son of Iraq was a colossal error.
According to the WSJ, Cheney & friends had the maps of the oil fields dividing them up among the oil companies well before the invasion.
Well, it didn't quite work out the way they planned it, did it?
So, to all other well deserved sorbriquets of W, just add:
Failed empire builder.
Posted by: ornery | December 31, 2009 8:51 PM
Yo Obama, you are a great Commander-in-Chief, keep up the good work!! A solid B plus!!!!
Posted by: Barry Sotero | December 31, 2009 9:52 PM
ornery can you show any proof for your rant. What did I say about you trying to be smart, now stop it. You're only making yourself look the fool.
Posted by: Crooks_In_DC | January 1, 2010 10:40 AM
You see, DC, we really do need that Truth Commission I've been asking for since 07.
I assume you'll be taking your winter vacation in sunny Baghdad?
Since Bush Wars have been "won", right?
You might want to leave behind some notes for your obit., however.....
Take along a bodyguard or two or three or twenty with you, like McCain.....
Posted by: ornery | January 1, 2010 12:19 PM
Ornery, Iraqi despots or Kuwaiti kings, that is not the issue. Kuwaiti people were being killed, beheaded, raped, tortured while Iraq occupied Kuwait. He also threatened the Saudi peninsula. And, yes, there was the economic factor too with all that oil.
When one reads all the remarks on the Trib site from the Left about Limbaugh needs to die quickly or too bad he isn't dead yet, it's not hard to figure out that when it comes to the slaughter of innocent people, whether it's in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Darfur, the Left really could care less and often cheerleads, at worst, and defends, at the least, the regimes doing such slaughtering.
Posted by: John D | January 1, 2010 2:03 PM
ornery:
(snip)
Or is there something fundamentally wrong with trying to be the new Roman Empire abroad while American society rots from within?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
there's money to be made and to the corpo-fascists and their waterboys in congress, that is all that matters.
As in Iraq and now Afghanistan, there are oil fields, natural gas reserves, uranium and mines..and bribes to be paid. Lots of money exchanging hands while our service personal act as security guards. Make no mistake about it, it's about money:
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/47.html
Posted by: writerofwrongs | January 1, 2010 2:18 PM
Looks like AQ does have tit for tat capability after all.
I'm glad I'm no traveling these holidays.
More attacks may be coming on the busiest day--would that be Sunday?
writerof wrongs, yes I do see.....
There was a Truman Commission (committee) during WW II.
Why is it we can't have a Truth Commission after two disastrous Bush wars?
Is it that the young are sheep?
Posted by: ornery | January 1, 2010 5:39 PM