Monday, November 19, 2007

Maybe Paul is right about the CIA

Ron Paul has called for the abolishment of the CIA. He bases that mainly on the blowback theory, saying we brought all this war on terror stuff on ourselves by our meddling in the affairs of other countries in the first place. One look at the Blind Sheikh case (or his friend Ali Mohammed) might be enough to convince some (ht Clarice at JOM).

But most rational folks would not suggest such a radical course of action in a world full of snakes, and you can add me to that group. However, that doesn't mean there aren't issues. Take the odd case of Nada Prouty, which seems to bolster the Paulsian theories. A native of Lebanon, Prouty gained US status via a sham marriage then proceeded to become a special agent for the FBI, later moving to the CIA due to her fluency in Arabic, this despite some of her family connections:
August 2002: Prouty's sister, Elfat El Aouar, and her brother-in-law, Talal Khalil Chahine, attended a fundraising event in Lebanon where the keynote speakers were Chahine himself and Sheikh Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah. Chahine sat to the right of Fadlallah, a position of prominence in the Middle East, spoke from the same podium as Fadlallah, and conferred with him privately.

Sheikh Fadlallah had previously been designated by the U.S. government as a specially designated global terrorist based upon his status as a leading ideological figure with Hizballah. Fadlallah issued the fatwa (religious ruling) authorizing the US Marine Corps barracks bombing that took place in Beirut on 23 October 1983. 299 military personnel and 6 civilians were killed.
Prouty recently pled guilty to several charges involving immigration fraud and will be processed out of the CIA, or so we're told. What media coverage this is getting has played up her sister's marriage to a Hizballah hotshot and her subsequent snooping to get information about him and her own family members. Some analysts say she was just looking out for her family. Others are less certain.

Was she a Hizballah mole? Our overall relationship with them remains a mystery, despite all the Americans they've killed over the years. For example, we still haven't been able to capture Mohammed Ali Hamadi, or even explain why Germany let him go to begin with. And surely Prouty's brother-in-law might know a little about this man. After all, Imad Moughnieh
is wanted for his alleged role in the kidnapping of Westerners in Lebanon in the 1980s, and suicide attacks on the U.S. Embassy and a Marine base in Lebanon that killed more than 260 Americans
Prouty's brother-in-law has been seen rubbing elbows with the Imam who issued the fatwa for that horrific truck bomb. Meanwhile Debbie Schlussel has been all over this story from the get-go, and says Prouty's family is Druze, which could explain a few things.

One thing not being sensationalized is that her publicized conviction would seemingly blow the cover of her former CIA contacts in the Middle East. Guess without involvement by the administration it's not a big story, since the Repubs could just as easily say it was the Clinton administration that hired her, so it's doubtful we'll see her 15 minutes extended via a Waxman hearing.

As to her background check, it's distressing to think the FBI could have missed a sham marriage in her past--it simply had to be known. Maybe the Feds, and later CIA, thought Proudy could get them closer to some of these Shia terror leaders or dangerous ideologues that are making Lebanon a mosh pit of international terrorism at the moment. Maybe they were watching her closely all along. Maybe we should give the benefit of the doubt to the countless thousands of intel professionals risking their lives daily to protect America. Maybe.

Or maybe a semi-attractive, articulate, multi-lingual female with the potential to improve somebody's resume hoodwinked our made-dominated services and eventually injured the country. After some of the events leading up to 9/11 that certainly must be considered. If so, perhaps it's time to gut the present CIA and re-invent a new one under a new name.

MORE 11/21/07

This seems topical.

No comments: