Probable CIA pick draws fire

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review ^ | May 8, 2006 | Tribune-Review

[NorthEasterner]

Probable CIA pick draws fire By staff and wire reports

Monday, May 8, 2006

WASHINGTON -- Even before President Bush has named his choice to take over the CIA, the Air Force general who is the front-runner drew fire Sunday from lawmakers in the president's own party who say a military man should not lead the civilian spy agency.

The criticism of the expected choice of Gen. Michael Hayden to head the CIA came from some influential Republicans in Congress as well as from Democrats.

[roses of sharon]

Republicans/Conservatives are always "influential" when they are whoring to the MSM.

[fatnotlazy]

And Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, who will oversee confirmation hearings for the post, acknowledged on CNN that there is some real concern about somebody from the military heading up the CIA. But he said that can be easily resolved by Hayden resigning his post and bringing in deputies with a strong civilian background.


***

Uh.....no, Mr. Roberts. Having too much civilian involvement and oversight is what's wrong with the CIA today. No, what we need is MORE military oversight, not less.

[angkor]

At it's creation, virtually all security agencies including the Pentagon and the FBI were opposed to a CIA under civilian control. In fact the first Director of the CIA was a Rear Admiral.

Time to get back to brass tacks.

[Robert Drobot]

This is just another double team Reb/dem dog and pony show to further anesthetize the American Citizen into believing those mindless nincompoops are earning their crossly overpaid paychecks. Truth is they'd give their left nut/left nipple if they could find a way to eliminate the American Citizen from looking over their shoulder.

[cake_crumb]

How stupid. Entirely civilian oversight and management is part of the CIA's problem. A lot of people, like McCarthy and Plame, hate the military and don't trust it on general principle. But what does the CIA DO, really? Global threat assessment. Who fights the bigger threats? It isn't State, because State generally just makes threats worse. It sure as heck isn't the CIA, because it's a civilian institution. It's the US military. Even when it's "UN peacekeepers", it's still mostly the US military.

Granted we need balance: no active member of the military should be working for it, so a good sprinkling of qualified former military from all branches - language officers and cryptanalysts, etc. - should be mixed in to balance the "progressive" civilians, who've been making the CIA progressively worse for years now. They would be a big help in analysis and cross department information sharing.

[Yo-Yo]

Military Influence = Adult Supervision, and the CIA is pi55ed.

[Dr. Frank fan]

I find it fascinating how the MSM simply just instinctively highlights the opinion of whichever percentage, faction, subgroup of people happens to disagree with whatever it is that President Bush has just done.

Any single decision a President makes will be opposed by some group of people or another. The fact that a decision has people who disagree with it isn't really newsworthy, therefore. But, while Bush has been President, like clockwork, it's always the same: Bush does/decides something, and the MSM spins "hey look, that group of people over there doesn't like it!" into a front-page headline, singling out for special mention the group of people which disagrees with Bush (whoever they happen to be on this or that given issue), as if their opinion/disagreement is somehow of overwhelming significance compared to those of us who agree, or don't care.

Bottom line: if you disagree with a Republican President, you're front-page news.

[pfflier]

Having too much civilian involvement and oversight is what's wrong with the CIA today. No, what we need is MORE military oversight, not less.

It seems that your logic of bring in more capable people defies the Washington concept of bring in more acceptable people.

The OSS, granddaddy of the CIA was created and run by Maj Gen "Wild Bill" Donovan. It worked.

[fatnotlazy]

That's the problem with a good many government agencies -- not just the CIA (FEMA comes to mind). Instead of rewarding campaign contributors and cronies with these jobs, we need to bring in people who are qualified to DO the job.