Lawmakers decry intelligence disarray

Boston Globe ^ | 11/15/04 | William C. Mann, AP

[kattracks]

WASHINGTON -- Intelligence agencies came under sharp attack yesterday from lawmakers, as did Congress, where a bill to put in place recommendations from the Sept. 11 commission has stalled heading into this week's postelection session.

[snip]

Disarray in the government's intelligence operations is most evident at the CIA less than two months after a new director, former Representative Porter Goss, was sworn in. Goss, a Florida Republican, was chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

''The agency seems in free fall in Washington, and that is a very, very bad omen in the middle of a war," Harman said on the CBS news program ''Face the Nation."

[snip]

''One thing that has become abundantly clear if it wasn't already: This is a dysfunctional agency and in some ways a rogue agency," McCain, an Arizona Republican, said on the ABC news program ''This Week."

He said the kind of shake-up that has been widely reported as causing dissent within the ranks of the CIA is absolutely necessary.

''Porter Goss is on the right track," McCain said. ''He is being savaged by these people that want the status quo, and the status quo is not satisfactory."

Senator Lindsey Graham added: ''Somebody needs to deal with the dynamic that led to us being so wrong [about Iraq]. If you have to hurt some feelings, so be it."

Graham, Republican of South Carolina, said he hopes Congress does not fail to address the issues raised by the commission probing the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

''If you've got it wrong, you need to be dealt with," Graham said. ''That includes the Congress: We got it wrong. We need to fix our own problems, and we're not doing a very good job of it."

[Just mythoughts]

I have to laugh when liberals cry about what they call disarray.

What it really means is their inside sources are withering on the vine.

[kcvl]

Exactly!

All those Clintonite leftovers, who don't have a clue about National security and couldn't care less.

[kb2614]

Very good point. The MSM will really be disappointed that all their inside sources are being canned.

Where will Dan Rather get his secret memo's now? Besides Kinko's that is.

[Just mythoughts]

"All those Clintonite leftovers, who don't have a clue about National security and couldn't care less."


I always keep that leaked memo out of Rockefeller's office foremost in my mind. That memo gave a road map, directing the liberals to gain 'intel' to take down President Bush.

The CIA and its house filled with mold sure set the standard as source point for the plotted and planned investigations. I expect that these that are fleeing will continue to fill the liberals collection systems upon which they can formulate future investigations.

[kattracks]

Also that their opportunity to undermine President Bush is being drastically reduced.

[Just mythoughts]

"Also that their opportunity to undermine President Bush is being drastically reduced."


I hope that a sufficient trail has been left that all 'mold' can be cleansed from the bottom up. We need no more Joe Wilson's popping up.

[shubi]

Most entrants into government during the Clinton administration could not pass the background check.

So, they lowered the standards. Funny, its the same thing they did to the SAT.

[Condor51]

Most entrants into government during the Clinton administration could not pass the background check.

I also recall they had to eliminate all Drug Testing for White House staff as 'most' failed on the first try. Now isn't that special.

[SuziQ]

''Porter Goss is on the right track," McCain said. ''He is being savaged by these people that want the status quo, and the status quo is not satisfactory."

Yep!

[lancer]

that leaked memo out of Rockefeller's office

How much trouble would it be to post that memo? I imagine many would like to see it.

[Just mythoughts]

http://www.intelmemo.com/

"http:Raw Data: Dem Memo on Iraq Intel
Thursday, November 06, 2003

STORIES
•Democrats Mull Politicizing Iraq War Intelligence•GOP Slams Dems for Politicizing Iraq Intel
Following is the text of a memo written by a Democrat on the staff of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that suggests how to make the greatest gain off of intelligence data leading to the war against Iraq. The memo was obtained by Fox News.

Transcript of a memo written by a Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee staff suggesting how to make the greatest gain off of intelligence data leading to the war against Iraq.

We have carefully reviewed our options under the rules and believe we have identified the best approach. Our plan is as follows:

1) Pull the majority along as far as we can on issues that may lead to major new disclosures regarding improper or questionable conduct by administration officials. We are having some success in that regard. For example, in addition to the president's State of the Union speech, the chairman has agreed to look at the activities of the Office of the Secretary of Defense as well as Secretary Bolton's office at the State Department. The fact that the chairman supports our investigations into these offices and co-signs our requests for information is helpful and potentially crucial. We don't know what we will find but our prospects for getting the access we seek is far greater when we have the backing of the majority. (Note: we can verbally mention some of the intriguing leads we are pursuing.)

2) Assiduously prepare Democratic "additional views" to attach to any interim or final reports the committee may release. Committee rules provide this opportunity and we intend to take full advantage of it. In that regard, we have already compiled all the public statements on Iraq made by senior administration officials. We will identify the most exaggerated claims and contrast them with the intelligence estimates that have since been declassified. Our additional views will also, among other things, castigate the majority for seeking to limit the scope of the inquiry. The Democrats will then be in a strong position to reopen the question of establishing an independent commission (i.e. the Corzine amendment).

3) Prepare to launch an independent investigation when it becomes clear we have exhausted the opportunity to usefully collaborate with the majority. We can pull the trigger on an independent investigation at any time-- but we can only do so once. The best time to do so will probably be next year either:

A) After we have already released our additional views on an interim report -- thereby providing as many as three opportunities to make our case to the public: 1) additional views on the interim report; 2) announcement of our independent investigation; and 3) additional views on the final investigation; or

B) Once we identify solid leads the majority does not want to pursue. We could attract more coverage and have greater credibility in that context than one in which we simply launch an independent investigation based on principled but vague notions regarding the "use" of intelligence.

In the meantime, even without a specifically authorized independent investigation, we continue to act independently when we encounter foot-dragging on the part of the majority. For example, the FBI Niger investigation was done solely at the request of the vice chairman; we have independently submitted written questions to DoD; and we are preparing further independent requests for information.

Summary

Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq. Yet, we have an important role to play in the revealing the misleading -- if not flagrantly dishonest methods and motives -- of the senior administration officials who made the case for a unilateral, preemptive war. The approach outline above seems to offer the best prospect for exposing the administration's dubious motives and methods."