Posted on 11/14/2004 10:51:38 AM PST by .cnI redruM
Senator McCain has decided to make CIA reform his visible issue in the coming year. Rather than settling for just saying he thinks the CIA needs to be fixed, he called them a rogue agency. Perhaps Valerie Plame could be described as a rouge agent moonlighting as a political smear merchant, but McCain has hyperbolized to keep his name in the headlines.
The occasion for this ruckus involved the Washington Polemic's efforts to smear Porter Goss. George W. Bush's new director of the CIA. It seems Goss intends to change how the CIA operates and the CIA doesn't feel like changing. Goss has offered eviscerating criticisms of the agency.
The CIA's loss of prestige stems from what many critics, McCain included, see as institutional failures to gather accurate information prior to the Iraq War. The games played by Joe Wilson and Agent Plame only reinforce this image of institutional chicanery. The CIA becomes a handy scapegoat for anyone who needs to explain why we haven't found Saddam's WMDs yet.
A more accurate target for national ire would be the congressional leaders who have 'reformed' the CIA into flaccid, embarassing impotence. Senator Frank Church accused them of being assassins and waghalters. He detailed what he believed to be American plots to assassinate Fidel Castro and other foreign despots. The CIA was also accused of serving as Boogeymen for the Nixonian purge of dissident groups.
Robert Toricelli also worried about the investigative practices of the CIA. As a congressman, he impressed his girlfriend Bianca Jagger by outing an alleged CIA recruiter in Guatamala. He also accused the CIA of being responsible for the deaths of two left-wing Guatamalan dissidents.
As a result of Torricelli's meddling, President Clinton issued an executive order forbidding the CIA from deling with criminal or terrorist informants. In other words, if an informant hangs around with bad guys, the CIA could not use their information. Torricelli than could not understand why the CIA didn't prevent 9/11.
Senator McCain may be voicing needed support for Porter Goss at the CIA. His motives may be good rather than jaded. However, when Senators tell the CIA how to collect intelligence, the US government seems to have a very hard time buying a clue. I can only hope John McCain will restrain himself to blasting media critics of Porter Goss and appoint himself to perform Mr. Goss' duties.
The C.I.A. Versus Bush
New York Times Columnist David Brooks picks up on our earlier short blog questioning the appropriateness of CIA officials using the media to express their anger towards George Bush. This trend violates all previous codes, customs and laws regarding the national security needs for discretion regarding Agency proceedings. Particularly brave of Mr. Brooks considering that the New York Times is a willing conspirator in discarding these standards.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/13/opinion/13brooks.html?ex=1258088400&en=1200c7d7b6677a9c&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland
Interesting piece.
Do you think Porter Goss is up to the job? I am reading mixed reviews on Steve Kappes- the deputy director of operations. From what I've learned so far- it's difficult as an outsider to discern whether people inside the agency are just PO'ed that there's housecleaning- or if Goss is really going about this wrong.
One thing we surely do NOT need are any more Church/Toricelli types making changes.
McCain is right on this one. The CIA is a rogue agency that has been operating in its own best interest rather than in America's for years. At the same time however, the likes of Church set it on that course.
In the aftermath of such calamities, massive changes must be made. I'm sick of the whining from the CIA, as if everything they've done wrong is someone else's fault. We would never accept such buck-passing from, say, Hillary Clinton or the border patrol.
The CIA is actively working against the President, and Bush's man is making changes. McCain, whatever his personal reasons (a politician doing things for his own benefit....gee, never seen that before) is backing W against a fatally flawed agency--what's the problem? If the CIA schmucks who've screwed up since the Church, Toricelli and Clinton restrictions don't like it, too bad.
McCain was very aggressive about the CIA on Meet the Press this morning.
Doesn't this sound just like typical McCain? Once his meddling has the exact opposite effect of what he says he's doing (just like Rush says about all Liberals,) he moves on to fresh territory in order to fix it so he can destroy that too.
The CIA-Bush-Gross issue is a difficult one to objectively analyze and decide who is acting in the best interest of the country. I must admit I've changed my mind three times on the issue and am still uncertain.
Goss may or may not be the perfect candidate. If the Senate meddles to obnoxiously, we will never find out. A lot of CIA careerists will reflexively fight change. They'll see it as killing the goose that lays their golden egg.
That was my first thought about Goss, but there may be more resignations tomorrow. We are therefore losing a lot of experienced leadership. However, the CIA may have become an entity where the primary objective is to protect itself with a "good ole boy" type mindset. In addition, Goss wants to empower the field officers, which may have prevented 9-11 if done earlier. I’m still uncertain.
Well then- perhaps their golden goose needs cooking.
But on the other hand, as another freeper has suggested, I've already changed my mind several times on this, and am likely to do it again before this is over. The very nature of this government agency- clandestine- makes it difficult for citizens to demand accountability.
Too often there are other agendas driving the public debate.
My argument is a bit incomplete. On the other side, I think the CIA is more like the US military than other government bureaucracies, so promotions are based on qualifications and the system is competent and closed. And remember the saying, “when you put on the second star, you become a politician”. Just think if someone tried to perform housecleaning within the military.
No kidding. What Torricelli used to do was flat-out treason!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.