The joint hearing of the House and Senate intelligence committees investigating the intelligence failures that resulted in the 9/11 attack took place against a backdrop of the Beltway sniper investigation. So it was largely overshadowed in the news cycle.
That's too bad. Because Tenet was trying to teach the American public something. He was saying, "Listen up, people. The good guys don't always win. The white hats can't always save the day."
What's ironic is that the whole sniper situation was a fine example of just what Tenet was talking about. No, it wasn't Al Qaeda, but it was an attack on the public that should have hammered home the hard truth that the police can't protect everyone from all harm.
That truth escaped most people. It especially eluded the journalists who covered the sniper case and who constantly posed the question, "why aren't the police doing more to catch him?" It's a loaded question and the load that it carries is an assumption that the officers and federal agents working the case were somehow incompetent, inept, or too caught up in inter-agency oneupmanship to properly execute their duties.
For me all this speculation reached its absurd apex when a producer for a British radio show called to talk about the sniper case. He wanted to know if I thought the British police would have wrapped up the sniper case much sooner than the Americans. That gave me pause. Why would anyone think the British police would have any more success shutting down a random sniper than the American officers working the case? No disrespect intended to our British readers, but unless Scotland Yard has moved to Hogwart's School for Wizards and Harry Potter is now an inspector, I can't imagine that you would have had any more luck catching a random, mobile serial killer than your Yank counterparts.