Spotlight Off Osama
[Grab the tin foil hats - see UPDATE]
The Times tells us that, while tracking Osama bin Laden remains a CIA priority, the special unit with that specific mission was disbanded late last year:
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.
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."
...
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.
MORE: The Times included this:
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."
I have no idea why the Times failed to mention that Michael Scheur was the author of "Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror", which was viewed as a bit of a Bush-basher. I also don't know why they failed to mention that Scheur was originally dropped from the Alec Station Bin Laden team in 1999 - had the CIA already predicted the outcome of the Florida recount?
STILL MORE: I have to bitterly dissent from Macsmind, who writes this:
[Scheur's] jive is old and he's been yaking it up since 2004. Expect the drive-by media to parade Richard Clarke any time now.
"Any time now"? We had a Richard Clarke sighting last week!
UPDATE: In a seemingly unrelated story also released this day, CNN tells us this:
Meanwhile, al-Zarqawi's wife told an Italian newspaper that al Qaeda leaders sold him out to the United States in exchange for a promise to let up in the search for Osama bin Laden.
The woman, identified by La Repubblica as al-Zarqawi's first wife, said al Qaeda's top leadership reached a deal with U.S. intelligence because al Zarqawi had become too powerful.
She claimed Sunni tribes and Jordanian secret services mediated the deal.
"My husband has been sold to the Americans," the woman said in an interview published Sunday. "He had become too powerful, too troublesome."
Could it be? Well, the Times says the unit was shut down "late last year", so the timeline is tricky, to say the least. Or in this case, maybe the CIA was clever enough to sell to Zarqawi's foes something they were planning to do anyway, namely close Alec Station.
Who knows? But what an intriguing coincidence that both these tidbits surfaced today.

Just when instigating Plamegate had convinced me that they weren't hiring 'em smart at 43rd St anymore.
Now they publish a leak aimed at enlisting Get-the-Barstid conservatives in the war against the war. Plus, any Dems need a lead talking point on terror? Makes one really wish that the Times were working for the US side.
Posted by: CS | July 04, 2006 at 08:42 AM
This looks like the Goss mole hunt is at work. Look for resignations or retirements soon.
Posted by: davod | July 04, 2006 at 10:15 AM
what, we only get Scheuer? Where are the pearls of wisdom from Larry Johnson and Joe Wilson?
Posted by: mark c. | July 04, 2006 at 11:03 AM
Replace them with some smart middle schoolers.
Posted by: clarice | July 04, 2006 at 11:05 AM
Mac probably means we'll be seeing more of Clarke in the next few weeks.
AJStrata had a few good words about Mike Schuer.
One AJStrata poster added the link regardling Laurie Mylroie, now frozen and placed under National Archives and Records Administration. Interesting move on the freeze.
P.S. We're still looking for OBL and his second-hand man through other avenues. Got that????
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 11:26 AM
TM-Why did you post this story? Seriously. Did you post it just so you could take a shot at Scheuer and slanted NYT coverage?
Do you have any opinion whatsoever on the fact this unit was disbanded?
Posted by: Pisistratus | July 04, 2006 at 11:39 AM
A shot at Scheuer? TM doesn't need to. The facts are already there to prove the failures of this unit because 9/11 happened. Besides, AJStrata took care of it for him.
The responsibilities of this unit were most likely absorbed by other units or agencies that could perform this job far better than this Alec unit.
I 'spect that the reason TM opened this thread is to give us a chance to express our opinions about this unit.
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 11:48 AM
Just before they took the decision to eliminate the unit, they tried something radical. They attempted a shake up by renaming it the "Alec Baldwin" unit. The hope was the redicule and jeering would wake up a hopelessly letharic unit. Instead much of the unit was ultimately banished to Canadian Duty.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | July 04, 2006 at 11:51 AM
Also, don't forget as Mac took note that this is just one more "leak" that NYT published, IF this was meant to be classified data.
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 11:51 AM
Of all the recent leaks published by NYT, how many leaks were about CIA? Any from the FBI, NSA, etc.?
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 11:54 AM
I thought the Rangers were looking to bin Laden, not the CIA. Afterall, wasn't it CIA-scary-Larry who said bin Laden was not a threat?
Posted by: Jane | July 04, 2006 at 12:30 PM
TM, Mac gave you UPDATE II at his site.
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 12:30 PM
If Scheuer is all that smart, why doesn't he know how to use the word "denigrate"?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | July 04, 2006 at 01:03 PM
Theory: the CIA group was removed from the search because the special forces are really getting close, and they don't want the Times to know.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | July 04, 2006 at 01:04 PM
TM-Why did you post this story? Seriously. Did you post it just so you could take a shot at Scheuer and slanted NYT coverage?
Do you have any opinion whatsoever on the fact this unit was disbanded?
Posted by: Pisistratus
How about it being a slow news day…
Mike Scheuer-what a piece of work…the NYT piece and more CIA-CYA can be summed up as follows, “We might not be right, but we are never wrong.”
This is the guy who told the 9-11 Commission that tracking terrorist finances would not be that useful because of the number of sources of money that OBL had -as if everyone who tracked down Abu Nidal had been put out to pasture, or no one thought about how Escobar met his end…the Clinton Administration, the gift that keeps on giving
thought the Rangers were looking to bin Laden, not the CIA
I thought it was Task Force 145, the group that got Zarkawi
Charlie, I was thinking that as well…time will tell I suppose.
And to everyone, Happy Independence Day
RichatUF
Posted by: RichatUF | July 04, 2006 at 01:38 PM
Theory: the CIA group was removed from the search because the special forces are really getting close, and they don't want the Times to know
*************
Yes indeed. Methinks someone in this group did not want Bin Laden captured. If finding him was their job, they didn't do it very well.
Posted by: SunnyDay | July 04, 2006 at 02:59 PM
Bones said it best
He's dead
Posted by: Der Hahn | July 04, 2006 at 04:49 PM
I'm not downloading, thanks.
Posted by: SunnyDay | July 04, 2006 at 04:54 PM
RUIF and SunnyDay, I sure hope your predictions would come true for both OBL and his second-hand man.
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 05:43 PM
America's first war against Islam....many, many years ago. Read it. It's an excellent write up by Flopping Aces.
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 06:07 PM
I found Richard Clarke's book in a thrift store, readin git now. He blames the CIA for everything... (Until Bush took office).
He seems to be an egomaniac, but some of the details are pretty interesting. And pretty damning.
Posted by: SunnyDay | July 04, 2006 at 06:59 PM
I thought they were tracking Obama. My bad.
Posted by: Luke | July 04, 2006 at 09:15 PM
Again I repeat my comment. Why does what Scheuer or Clarke say matter? They no longer have any power. Just like Wilson they like to be in the spotlight and to see their name in print. NYT is happy to oblige them in this regard but serious-minded people don't give them the time of day. Washed up has-beens the lot of them.
Posted by: maryrose | July 04, 2006 at 09:16 PM
I 'spect that the reason TM opened this thread is to give us a chance to express our opinions about this unit.
Bingo. I didn't expect to have much time today, but this looked like a likely topic of blogospheric buzz.
Posted by: Tom Maguire | July 04, 2006 at 09:51 PM
This is a left over from Goss's ferets trying to get the leakers. Look for resignations or firings soon.
Posted by: davod | July 04, 2006 at 09:55 PM
When I read the Times link; I first thought, they disbanded TF 121; that's
the joint special forces group, in
charge of hunting Bin Laden in the
stans; but it turns out it was only
the Alec Station; Scheur's archive\
and I hue, that's a close one. The
reality that Bin Laden, if he is alive
is not Afghanistan; or even the mountains
of Pakistan, but it a cosy cul de sac of
Peshawar or Quetta; seeing how the've
caught KSM, Zubeydah,in Lahore, Rawalpindi
et al;
Posted by: narciso | July 04, 2006 at 10:03 PM
This poll says that UBL has favorability levels in the Arab world that make GWB look good. Somalian leaders are not-so-quietly telling Osama Bin Laden that they were practicing Islam while the Al Qaeda terrorist was still sucking his thumb.
Posted by: Neo | July 04, 2006 at 10:31 PM
Don't forget that this is also part of the larger scale dismantiling and restructuring being undertaken by Negroponte. It began almost immediately on his appointment, with the Director of National Intelligence replacing the DCI in Presidential briefings and at the National Security Council.
CIA analysts have been siphoned off to the National Counterterrorism Center, and other departmental roles reduced, at the expense of the CIA's own Counterterrorism Center. As additional resources are allocated elsewhere, the CIA is being whittled down to the Directorate of Operations charged primarily with human intelligence collection. It also looks like Negroponte may have ceded "targeted military operations" to the Pentagon. If so, perhaps that where the real Osama hunting will be handled.
Posted by: JM Hanes | July 05, 2006 at 01:24 AM
"It also looks like Negroponte may have ceded "targeted military operations" to the Pentagon. If so, perhaps that where the real Osama hunting will be handled.".
Which is where it needs to be handled, within DOD. Let the ones who can take action on the intelligence collect it. Fewer chances for leaks, missunderstandings, and better chances for a positive outcomes with less beauracracy.
Posted by: Pofarmer | July 05, 2006 at 11:22 AM
Anything done to keep NYT out of the fight against terrorism loop is fine with me.
Posted by: maryrose | July 05, 2006 at 11:45 AM
Anyone see where ABC is making Clarke's book into a miniseries? The article about is is by Michael Sheuer (sp?).
Clarke's spin on the story is something else. I think someone misunderstood my previous post about Clarke's book.
It is quite obvious, if one is even mildly informed on the subject of the Clinton adminstration and OBL, that Clarke has distorted the facts, making himself the hero, and shifting the blame for the lack of response to terrorism completely off of the Clinton administration.
I have been hoping to find some evidence as to what Sandy hid in his pants. ;)
Posted by: SunnyDay | July 05, 2006 at 12:10 PM
Tommy Franks pretty much said in his book that Clarke was useless.
Posted by: Pofarmer | July 05, 2006 at 01:33 PM
Saw Sandy Berger on Larry King Live. How long a shelf life does a former Clinton official get?
Posted by: maryrose | July 05, 2006 at 09:16 PM
They keep coming back to life - like a Stephen King novel. :D
Posted by: SunnyDay | July 06, 2006 at 11:46 AM
I think the search for OBL might have to be shifted to the netherworld. Not a single shot of his punum in 2 years and he didn't look to zaftig the last time we saw it.
Posted by: clarice | July 06, 2006 at 12:05 PM
Need to check with Art Bell... ;)
Posted by: SunnyDay | July 06, 2006 at 03:47 PM