Posted on 05/15/2006 11:14:31 AM PDT by RWR8189
Assuming that Michael Hayden is confirmed as CIA director, the agency will be in strong hands--especially if, as rumored, Stephen Kappes is appointed his deputy. General Hayden is the nation's senior intelligence officer (his current boss, John Negroponte, the director of national intelligence, is a career diplomat rather than an intelligence professional). Mr. Kappes, a former director of the operations (human intelligence) division of the CIA, is highly respected throughout the intelligence community. These appointments will not "recenter" the beleaguered Central Intelligence Agency, which is being squeezed from three sides: The Defense Department, the FBI and the director of national intelligence are all encroaching on functions once securely within the CIA's domain. But with luck, Messrs. Hayden and Kappes can prevent a further erosion of the agency's standing, restore morale and take care that the CIA performs its core functions competently.
The picture may be brightening as far as foreign intelligence is concerned, but it remains dark with respect to domestic intelligence. In my forthcoming book, I explain why burying our principal assets for detecting terrorist plots that unfold within the U.S. in a criminal-investigation agency--the FBI--is unsound. We are the only major country that does this. The U.K.'s domestic intelligence agency, MI5, works closely with Scotland Yard, Britain's counterpart to the FBI. But it is not part of Scotland Yard.
The British understand that a criminal-investigation culture and an intelligence culture don't mix. A crime occurs at a definite time and place, enabling a focused investigation likely to culminate in an arrest and conviction. Intelligence seeks to identify enemies and their plans before any crime occurs. It searches for terrorist sleeper cells in the U.S. with no assurance of finding any. Hunting needles in a haystack is uncongenial work for FBI special agents. And so at the same time
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
Is it to be assumed that there are no people (citizens or other) inside our nation plotting against us? Either we trust our Government or we don't. Our enemies use any distrust against us.
I thought that was called the FBI?
That's exactly what I was going to say.
We have one. Its called the FBI.
This strikes me as a Chuck Rangel -- "Let's bring back the draft" idea. That was proposed by someone who hated the idea, for the purpose of beating Republicans over the head with it as soon as anyone was dumb enough to say "Chuck may be right".
With all the bad publicity Bush is getting right now, I think the last thing he wants to say is "I want a new agency -- one which is totally focused on spying on Americans!"
As others have said, we have the FBI. We don't need this.
I have a pretty good hunch that this is happening already, and I'm not so keen on this idea. If the CIA is unleashed and allowed to spy at home, where are the controls, who is going to rein these guys in? I just do not trust the govt, and I really don't care who it is, Republican or Democrat, this is just too damn open for abuse. Look at the rouge elements in the CIA already, they are doing their best to thwart the President every time he makes a move. This is gonna be bad juju.
CTU!
We need something like the CTU, anyway. And Jack Bauer. Several thousand of him.
That spys on whom?
Me too.
Whomever President Rodham shall deem a threat.
This is why we need to teach more history in schools. Very few people remember the Church committee hearings and the many good reasons why the CIA is prohibited from operating inside the US.
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.