Either you understand the nature of the "vast
reich-wing conspiracy" and how it operates or you will
lose this Republic...There is no viable political
alternative to regime change in the US, the US
intelligence community knows it, the US military knows
it, the US foreign policy establishment knows it...But
the "US mainstream news media," in particular the
major network news organizations, are still trembling
in the dark, carrying the Bush cabal's filthy water on
Michael Moore's movie, Bill Clinton's book, Al Gore's
speeches and the candidacy of Sen. John F. Kerry
(D-Mekong Delta)...
Ray McGovern, www.truthout.org: There is, thankfully,
a remnant of CIA professionals who still put objective
analysis above political correctness and career
advancement. Just when they thought there were no
indignities left for them to suffer, they are
shuddering again at press reports that Rep. Porter
Goss (R-FL) may soon be their new boss...
The intelligence process, of course, was not the only
thing undermined. So was the Constitution. Various
drafts of that NIE, reinforced with heavy doses of
"mushroom-cloud" rhetoric, were used to deceive
congressmen and senators into ceding to the executive
their prerogative to declare war - the all-important
prerogative that the framers of the Constitution took
great care to reserve exclusively to our elected
representatives in Congress...
There seems a better than even chance the Bush
administration will nominate Goss, and use the
nomination hearings as yet another forum at which to
blame the Iraq debacle on faulty intelligence. And, as
a bonus for Bush, if there is time before the
election, it would seem a safe bet that Goss will be
able to bring to heel recalcitrant analysts who are
still "fighting the problem," still staring in
disbelief at the given wisdom (given, apparently, only
to the Pentagon and White House) that Iraq and
al-Qaeda were in bed with each other.
Repudiate the 9/11 Cover-Up and the Iraq War Lies,
Show Up for Democracy in 2004: Defeat Bush (again!)
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/070304A.shtml
Cheney Cat's Paw, Porter Goss, as CIA Director?
By Ray McGovern
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Saturday 03 July 2004
There is, thankfully, a remnant of CIA
professionals who still put objective analysis above
political correctness and career advancement. Just
when they thought there were no indignities left for
them to suffer, they are shuddering again at press
reports that Rep. Porter Goss (R-FL) may soon be their
new boss.
That possibility conjures up a painful flashback
for those of us who served as CIA analysts when
Richard Nixon was president. Chalk it up to our
naiveté, but we were taken aback when swashbuckling
James Schlesinger, who followed Richard Helms as CIA
director, announced on arrival, "I am here to see that
you guys don't screw Richard Nixon!" To underscore his
point, Schlesinger told us he would be reporting
directly to White House political adviser Bob Haldeman
(Nixon's Karl Rove) and not to National Security
Adviser Henry Kissinger.
No doubt Goss would be more discreet in showing
his hand, but his appointment as director would be the
ultimate in politicization. He has long shown himself
to be under the spell of Vice President Dick Cheney,
and would likely report primarily to him and to White
House political adviser Karl Rove rather than to
National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.
Goss would almost certainly follow lame-duck
director George Tenet's practice of reading to the
president in the morning and become an integral part
of the "White House team." The team-membership
phenomenon is particularly disquieting.
If the failure-prone experience of the past few
years has told us anything, it is that being a "team
member" in good standing is the kiss of death for the
CIA director's primary role of "telling it like it is"
to the president and his senior advisers. It was a
painful moment of truth when former Speaker Newt
Gingrich - like Cheney, a frequent visitor to CIA
headquarters - told the press that Tenet was "so
grateful to the president that he would do anything
for him."
The Whore of Babylon
One need look no farther than what has become
known as a latter-day Whore of Babylon - the National
Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of Oct. 1, 2002, the very
title of which betrayed a politically correct, but
substantively wrong, conclusion: "Iraq's Continuing
Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction." And bear in
mind that it was only several months after President
Bush decided to attack Iraq that Tenet commissioned
that estimate. Not unreasonably, Congress was
wondering about the views of the intelligence
community, and the White House needed congressional
acquiescence.
No problem. "Slam-dunk" Tenet, following White
House instructions, ensured that the estimate was
cooked to the recipe of Cheney's tart speech of August
26, 2002. "We know that Saddam has resumed his efforts
to acquire nuclear weapons," Cheney said, and the
estimate Tenet signed gave belated endorsement - with
"high confidence," no less - to that lie.
The intelligence process, of course, was not the
only thing undermined. So was the Constitution.
Various drafts of that NIE, reinforced with heavy
doses of "mushroom-cloud" rhetoric, were used to
deceive congressmen and senators into ceding to the
executive their prerogative to declare war - the
all-important prerogative that the framers of the
Constitution took great care to reserve exclusively to
our elected representatives in Congress.
What was actually happening was clear to
intelligence analysts, active and retired. We Veteran
Intelligence Professionals for Sanity were not the
only ones to expose it as clearly and often as the
domesticated US media would allow.
But what about CIA alumnus Porter Goss, then in
his sixth year as chairman of the House intelligence
oversight committee? Republican party loyalist first
and foremost, Goss chose to give an entirely new
meaning to "oversight." Even when it became clear that
the "mushroom cloud" reporting was based mostly on a
forgery, he just sat back and watched it all happen.
Like Br'er Fox, he didn't say nothin'.
From Sycophant Tenet to Professional Politician
This is what CIA would get with Porter Goss at the
helm. Appointing Goss would administer the coup de
grace to intelligence analysts trying to survive while
still speaking truth without fear or favor. The only
saving grace for them would be the likelihood that
they would be spared "multiple visits" by Cheney to
the inner sanctum where it used to be possible to
produce unvarnished analysis without vice presidents
and other policy makers looking over their shoulders
to ensure they "had thought of everything." Goss, who
has a long history of subservience to Cheney, could be
counted upon to play the Cheney/Gingrich/et al. role
himself.
Don't Throw Me in That Briar Patch
Last month when Tenet was let go, administration
officials indicated that a permanent replacement would
not be named until after the election. They indicated
they wanted to avoid washing the dirty linen of
intelligence once again in public. Evidently, they had
not yet checked with Karl Rove.
The Democrats warn smugly that an attempt by the
administration to confirm a new CIA director could
become an embarrassing referendum on CIA's recent
performance, but they miss the point entirely - and
show, once again, that they can't hold a candle to
Rove for political cleverness. The name of the
administration's game is to blame Iraq on intelligence
failures, and Goss already did so last week in what
amounted to his first campaign speech for the job of
director. Consider court historian Bob Woodward's
book, Plan of Attack, which Condoleezza Rice and other
officials have promoted. Rice has publicly confirmed
Woodward's story about Tenet misleading the president
by claiming the evidence on Iraqi weapons of mass
destruction was a "slam dunk."
While there is ample evidence of ineptitude on
Tenet's part, this now-famous vignette obscures the
fact that President Bush had unleashed the dogs of war
well before checking to see if there was any credible
intelligence to justify doing so. As the election
nears, it serves the administration nicely to keep the
focus on intelligence shortcomings and to make it
appear that the president was misled - on weapons of
mass destruction, for example. And Porter Goss is
precisely the right person to cooperate in this
effort. I can imagine Rove laughing up his sleeve last
week at word that the Democrats are urging Senate
minority leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) to prepare for
extensive confirmation hearings this fall. (In my
mind's eye I can see Rove musing, Bring em on!)
The report due later this month by the Senate
Intelligence Committee investigating intelligence
performance regarding the long-sought-after Iraqi
weapons of mass destruction is said to be scathing in
its criticism of CIA. No problem. This too will help
keep the focus where the White House wants it - the
more so since committee chair and Republican stalwart
Pat Roberts (R-KS) can be counted on to do whatever
Cheney and Rove tell him to do. It was not until
Roberts was instructed to give Tenet the cold shoulder
that the latter began to see the handwriting on the
wall.
And Republicans are also in control of the 9/11
commission, which will be issuing its own report later
this month. There are already signs that Republican
commissioners have begun to water down findings
critical of the administration, while highlighting
those critical of intelligence performance.
Goss was happy to let the Senate intelligence
committee take the lead in investigating intelligence
performance on key issues like weapons of mass
destruction and, before he decided to promote his
candidacy for director, he generally chose to keep his
committee's head (and his own) down. With good reason.
The myriad shortcomings in intelligence work appeared
on his somnolent watch; by any reasonable standard, he
bears some responsibility for impaired oversight - not
only on Iraq, but on 9/11 as well.
Goss on 9/11
With respect to the various investigations into
9/11, Goss was thrust into the limelight by Cheney,
who initially opposed any investigation at all. In
February 2002, Cheney went so far as to warn that if
Congress decided to go ahead with an investigation,
administration officials might not show up to testify.
When folks started talking about the need for a
genuinely independent commission, though, Cheney
acquiesced in the establishment of the congressional
joint committee as the lesser evil and took
reassurance in the fact that Goss could be counted on
to keep the lid on - and, when necessary, run rings
around co-chair Sen. Bob Graham, (D-FL).
Porter Goss performed that task brilliantly,
giving clear priority to providing political
protection for the president. Goss acquiesced when the
White House and CIA refused to allow the joint
committee to report out any information on what
President Bush had been told before 9/11 - ostensibly
because it was "classified." This gave rise to thinly
disguised, but eloquently expressed, chagrin on the
part of the committee staff director, who clearly had
expected stronger backing in her negotiations with
White House officials.
As a result, completely absent from the
committee's report was any mention of the President's
Daily Brief of Aug. 6, 2001, which bore the title "Bin
Laden determined to strike in US," even though the
press had already reported the title and the gist of
that damning piece of evidence. Small wonder that the
families of 9/11 victims were outraged and pressed
even harder for an independent investigation.
And a First for a Congressional Committee
The most notable (and bizarre) achievement of the
joint committee was inviting the FBI to investigate
members of Congress. In June 2002, Cheney called Goss
and Graham to chastise them for a media leak of
sensitive information from intercepted communications.
A CNN report had attributed the leak to "two
congressional sources," and Cheney was livid.
Goss admitted to being "chagrined" over Cheney's
call. He and Graham promptly bypassed normal
congressional procedures and went directly to Attorney
General John Ashcroft, asking him to investigate the
leak. Little thought apparently was given to the
separation of powers between the executive and
congressional branches, or the fact that Congress has
its own capability for such investigations.
Next thing you know, the FBI is crawling all over
Capitol Hill, questioning members of the joint
committee that is investigating the FBI, CIA, et al.,
and asking members of Congress to submit to
lie-detector tests. Shaking his head, Sen. John McCain
(R-NM) noted the ludicrousness of allowing the FBI to
build dossiers on lawmakers who are supposed to be
investigating the FBI. He and others joined those
pushing for the creation of an independent 9/11
commission.
That Goss and Graham could be so easily
intimidated by Cheney speaks volumes.
Bottom Line
West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the ranking
Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee is right
in saying, "We need a director who is not only
knowledgeable and capable but unquestionably
independent." And politicians need not apply.
Rockefeller would rule out "any politician from either
party." But who pays attention to minority members
these days - ranking or non-ranking? Rockefeller might
have added that another prerequisite is prior
experience managing a large, complex organization.
Tenet had none; neither does Goss.
There seems a better than even chance the Bush
administration will nominate Goss, and use the
nomination hearings as yet another forum at which to
blame the Iraq debacle on faulty intelligence. And, as
a bonus for Bush, if there is time before the
election, it would seem a safe bet that Goss will be
able to bring to heel recalcitrant analysts who are
still "fighting the problem," still staring in
disbelief at the given wisdom (given, apparently, only
to the Pentagon and White House) that Iraq and
al-Qaeda were in bed with each other.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ray McGovern, a CIA analyst for 27 years, is
co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for
Sanity. He is also the author of "A Compromised CIA:
What Can Be Done?" - Chapter 4 in "Patriotism,
Democracy and Common Sense", to be published in
September by the Eisenhower Foundation. His chapter
includes a long section titled "The Qualities Needed
in a Director of Central Intelligence."
-------