Rate the FBI's response

[CrusaderFrank]

This is a tough one, think it through

 

[TheSuaveOne]

Response to what?

-TSO

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Response to what?

-TSO

Wait for poll

 

[TheSuaveOne]

Response to what?

-TSO

Wait for poll

LOL, my bad.

-TSO

 

[beowolfe]

Rather than compare the two, I'd simply give them an A on one and an F on the other. But knowing how the 'intelligence' system is today, I wouldn't blame the FBI for the underwear bomb plot getting as far as it did, since that was not totally in their control as was the shooting at Ft. Hood.

This attempt at phone tapping is all FBI. They didn't have to wait, nor were they dependent, on the CIA or any other intelligence agency.

 

[Vast LWC]

A shooting incident at Ft Hood is the responsibility of the Military Police, not the FBI.

Now, if you want to talk about intelligence gathering, rather than "response", we would have a conversation.

But your poll, as it stands, makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[chanel]

I wonder if O'Keefe's name had four more syllables and a bunch of unpronouncible vowels, it would have taken longer. Things that make you go "hmmmmm".

 

[Liability]

A shooting incident at Ft Hood is the responsibility of the Military Police, not the FBI.

I don't believe that's exactly correct, but let's say it is:

It's very much like a natural disaster (like a hurricane in New Orleans, for example) for which prior warnings were given far in advance is the responsibility of the locality's State and the locality itself, not of the U.S. Federal Government.

Now, if you want to talk about intelligence gathering, rather than "response", we would have a conversation.

But your poll, as it stands, makes no sense whatsoever.

It makes sense unless we adopt your contention as fact. That seems like a silly thing to do. Why would not the FBI have jurisdiction over a possible terrorist act committed within the borders of the United States? You can't seriously be contending that the FEDERAL Bureau of investigation has no jurisdiction merely because the military also has jurisdiction?

An FBI official seems to disagree with you, in fact.

TOM FUENTES, FORMER FBI ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (via phone): Well, the investigation is going to be very extensive on a number of areas. [On the CNN Show with Anderson Cooper]

* * * *

COOPER: And obviously, investigators will be looking at any possible terror links. We've heard from the commander of the base who said at this point there's no evidence to indicate that. Is that something the FBI would be in charge of or other groups and homeland security?

FUENTES: No, as far as the jurisdiction in a case like this, you have the military base is a federal government reservation. So it actually comes under the authority of the U.S. military police for day-to-day patrol activities, arms criminal investigative division for investigations.

But when you have a capital crime committed on a military base, then that becomes the jurisdiction of the FBI. So even if it's not a terrorist act but merely 12 murders, it's still FBI jurisdiction in that case. But again, it will be a cooperative effort with as many different investigative agencies as can lend expertise to the case.

CNN.com - Transcripts

 

[Shogun]

I bet Randy Weaver asks the same kind of question...

 

[L.K.Eder]

I wonder if O'Keefe's name had four more syllables and a bunch of unpronouncible vowels, it would have taken longer. Things that make you go "hmmmmm".

if muhammad bin walid al amriki had been found in the senators office in the same circumstances as o'kweek, the fbi would not have been called, or later, is that what you are saying, hmmmmmmm. i wonder if you are challenged.

 

[Vast LWC]

A shooting incident at Ft Hood is the responsibility of the Military Police, not the FBI.

I don't believe that's exactly correct, but let's say it is:

It's very much like a natural disaster (like a hurricane in New Orleans, for example) for which prior warnings were given far in advance is the responsibility of the locality's State and the locality itself, not of the U.S. Federal Government.

Now, if you want to talk about intelligence gathering, rather than "response", we would have a conversation.

But your poll, as it stands, makes no sense whatsoever.

It makes sense unless we adopt your contention as fact. That seems like a silly thing to do. Why would not the FBI have jurisdiction over a possible terrorist act committed within the borders of the United States? You can't seriously be contending that the FEDERAL Bureau of investigation has no jurisdiction merely because the military also has jurisdiction?

An FBI official seems to disagree with you, in fact.

TOM FUENTES, FORMER FBI ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (via phone): Well, the investigation is going to be very extensive on a number of areas. [On the CNN Show with Anderson Cooper]

* * * *

COOPER: And obviously, investigators will be looking at any possible terror links. We've heard from the commander of the base who said at this point there's no evidence to indicate that. Is that something the FBI would be in charge of or other groups and homeland security?

FUENTES: No, as far as the jurisdiction in a case like this, you have the military base is a federal government reservation. So it actually comes under the authority of the U.S. military police for day-to-day patrol activities, arms criminal investigative division for investigations.

But when you have a capital crime committed on a military base, then that becomes the jurisdiction of the FBI. So even if it's not a terrorist act but merely 12 murders, it's still FBI jurisdiction in that case. But again, it will be a cooperative effort with as many different investigative agencies as can lend expertise to the case.

CNN.com - Transcripts

However, the initial response to the crime, and arrest, would be by the Military Police. The ongoing investigation, after the fact, would be by the FBI.

In the O'Keefe case, the actual response and arrest was, and should have been handled by the FBI.

The OP was to judge the FBI's RESPONSE, not the ensuing investigation.

 

[Vast LWC]

I wonder if O'Keefe's name had four more syllables and a bunch of unpronouncible vowels, it would have taken longer. Things that make you go "hmmmmm".

if muhammad bin walid al amriki had been found in the senators office in the same circumstances as o'kweek, the fbi would not have been called, or later, is that what you are saying, hmmmmmmm. i wonder if you are challenged.

If a Muslim was found to be illegally trespassing in disguise in a Senator's office pretending to be a phone technician?

Are you kidding me?

The FBI, CIA, DHS, and everyone else and their mother would be all over that.

 

[The T]

Knowing the precepts of BOTH scenarios? It's EASY. My vote is cast.

 

[The T]

I wonder if O'Keefe's name had four more syllables and a bunch of unpronouncible vowels, it would have taken longer. Things that make you go "hmmmmm".

if muhammad bin walid al amriki had been found in the senators office in the same circumstances as o'kweek, the fbi would not have been called, or later, is that what you are saying, hmmmmmmm. i wonder if you are challenged.

If a Muslim was found to be illegally trespassing in disguise in a Senator's office pretending to be a phone technician?

Are you kidding me?

The FBI, CIA, DHS, and everyone else and their mother would be all over that.

You are too easily distracted. Just Vote.

 

[NYcarbineer]

FBI agents were dispatched to the scene right after the shooting.

Frank is digging himself a deep hole here. It's mildly amusing.

 

[Vast LWC]

You are too easily distracted. Just Vote.

As soon as I am provided with an applicable response, like:

• The Military Police responded faster than the FBI in the Ft Hood case.

 

[Liability]

A shooting incident at Ft Hood is the responsibility of the Military Police, not the FBI.

I don't believe that's exactly correct, but let's say it is:

It's very much like a natural disaster (like a hurricane in New Orleans, for example) for which prior warnings were given far in advance is the responsibility of the locality's State and the locality itself, not of the U.S. Federal Government.



It makes sense unless we adopt your contention as fact. That seems like a silly thing to do. Why would not the FBI have jurisdiction over a possible terrorist act committed within the borders of the United States? You can't seriously be contending that the FEDERAL Bureau of investigation has no jurisdiction merely because the military also has jurisdiction?

An FBI official seems to disagree with you, in fact.

TOM FUENTES, FORMER FBI ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (via phone): Well, the investigation is going to be very extensive on a number of areas. [On the CNN Show with Anderson Cooper]

* * * *

COOPER: And obviously, investigators will be looking at any possible terror links. We've heard from the commander of the base who said at this point there's no evidence to indicate that. Is that something the FBI would be in charge of or other groups and homeland security?

FUENTES: No, as far as the jurisdiction in a case like this, you have the military base is a federal government reservation. So it actually comes under the authority of the U.S. military police for day-to-day patrol activities, arms criminal investigative division for investigations.

But when you have a capital crime committed on a military base, then that becomes the jurisdiction of the FBI. So even if it's not a terrorist act but merely 12 murders, it's still FBI jurisdiction in that case. But again, it will be a cooperative effort with as many different investigative agencies as can lend expertise to the case.

CNN.com - Transcripts

However, the initial response to the crime, and arrest, would be by the Military Police. The ongoing investigation, after the fact, would be by the FBI.

In the O'Keefe case, the actual response and arrest was, and should have been handled by the FBI.

The OP was to judge the FBI's RESPONSE, not the ensuing investigation.

WTF are you babbling about?

The jurisdiction does not belong just to the military, as you had incorrectly suggested.

Why not just simplify things and admit that you were wrong?