It was all over the news. He could have said he hadn't been briefed on it, instead of a "what you talking about" type reaction.Is there any reason the head of US Intelligence should be informed immediately when someone is arrested?
When did Brittan notify the US of the arrest? In news articles, it has been stated that the arrests were not connected to any planned attacks outside of Britain. Would the US intelligence officials review the arrest and prepare a report for the Chief Intelligence Officer? If it was determined to be a low priority(for the US) as seems to be in this case, would there be an urgent need to inform him? Might he have been involved through out the day with other higher priority issues.
In short does the head of US Intelligence need to be informed immediately every time someone is arrested in the world?:smil:
A release to the press saying that 12 men had been arrested for terrorism, may be great. With out in-depth information and assessment it would be worthless to an intelligence chief.
It was all over the news. He could have said he hadn't been briefed on it, instead of a "what you talking about" type reaction.
Is there any reason the head of US Intelligence should be informed immediately when someone is arrested?
When did Brittan notify the US of the arrest? In news articles, it has been stated that the arrests were not connected to any planned attacks outside of Britain. Would the US intelligence officials review the arrest and prepare a report for the Chief Intelligence Officer? If it was determined to be a low priority(for the US) as seems to be in this case, would there be an urgent need to inform him? Might he have been involved through out the day with other higher priority issues.
In short does the head of US Intelligence need to be informed immediately every time someone is arrested in the world?:smil:
A release to the press saying that 12 men had been arrested for terrorism, may be great. With out in-depth information and assessment it would be worthless to an intelligence chief.
For the president’s top intelligence officer not to be intimately familiar with the case—and not to have been briefed before a network interview—is stunning.
Why? Because he is your top intelligence official. How can he not know about these major arrests on the day they happened...even if they ARE bogus? Their veracity is not the point. They still happened. It's like not knowing the weatherman is predicting 40 inches of snow. It might not be legit, but he predicted it, causing responsible people to take certain actions to prepare.
So what are the facts?
When was the arrest made? I assume it was undercover so the US would probably not be informed of a purely British operation, until it was over.(Or should all governments be required to report in advance all operations to US Intelligence?)
Is this a case of the British "blowing it", by not reporting to American intelligence in a timely manner before they released information to the press.
Seems a lot of information is not available to us.
When did Brittan's Intel inform their American counterparts?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.