Bush to Purge CIA

[DLR'sCock]

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationwo...-top-headlines



CIA Plans to Purge Its Agency
By Knut Royce
Newsday

Sunday 14 November 2004

Sources say White House has ordered new chief to eliminate officers who were disloyal to Bush.
Washington - The White House has ordered the new CIA director, Porter Goss, to purge the agency of officers believed to have been disloyal to President George W. Bush or of leaking damaging information to the media about the conduct of the Iraq war and the hunt for Osama bin Laden, according to knowledgeable sources.

"The agency is being purged on instructions from the White House," said a former senior CIA official who maintains close ties to both the agency and to the White House. "Goss was given instructions ... to get rid of those soft leakers and liberal Democrats. The CIA is looked on by the White House as a hotbed of liberals and people who have been obstructing the president's agenda."

One of the first casualties appears to be Stephen R. Kappes, deputy director of clandestine services, the CIA's most powerful division. The Washington Post reported yesterday that Kappes had tendered his resignation after a confrontation with Goss' chief of staff, Patrick Murray, but at the behest of the White House had agreed to delay his decision till tomorrow.

But the former senior CIA official said that the White House "doesn't want Steve Kappes to reconsider his resignation. That might be the spin they put on it, but they want him out." He said the job had already been offered to the former chief of the European Division who retired after a spat with then-CIA Director George Tenet.

Another recently retired top CIA official said he was unsure Kappes had "officially resigned, but I do know he was unhappy."

Without confirming or denying that the job offer had been made, a CIA spokesman asked Newsday to withhold naming the former officer because of his undercover role over the years. He said he had no comment about Goss' personnel plans, but he added that changes at the top are not unusual when new directors come in.

On Friday John E. McLaughlin, a 32-year veteran of the intelligence division who served as acting CIA director before Goss took over, announced that he was retiring. The spokesman said that the retirement had been planned and was unrelated to the Kappes resignation or to other morale problems inside the CIA.

It could not be learned yesterday if the White House had identified Kappes, a respected operations officer, as one of the officials "disloyal" to Bush.

"The president understands and appreciates the sacrifices made by the members of the intelligence community in the war against terrorism," said a White House official of the report that he was purging the CIA of "disloyal" officials. " . . . The suggestion [that he ordered a purge] is inaccurate."

But another former CIA official who retains good contacts within the agency said that Goss and his top aides, who served on his staff when Goss was chairman of the House intelligence committee, believe the agency had relied too much over the years on liaison work with foreign intelligence agencies and had not done enough to develop its own intelligence collection system.

"Goss is not a believer in liaison work," said this retired official. But, he said, the CIA's "best intelligence really comes from liaison work. The CIA is simply not going to develop the assets [agents and case officers] that would meet the intelligence requirements."

Tensions between the White House and the CIA have been the talk of the town for at least a year, especially as leaks about the mishandling of the Iraq war have dominated front pages.

Some of the most damaging leaks came from Michael Scheuer, former head of the CIA's Bin Laden unit, who wrote a book anonymously called "Imperial Hubris" that criticized what he said was the administration's lack of resolve in tracking down the al-Qaida chieftain and the reallocation of intelligence and military manpower from the war on terrorism to the war in Iraq. Scheuer announced Thursday that he was resigning from the agency.

-------

[ELVIS]

..and your point in posting this article is ??

[Warham]

Bush needs to make sure the CIA bows to his wishes...

::insert cackling laughter of Emperor from Star Wars here::

[Nickdfresh]

George W. Stalin

Purging the CIA intelligence directorate of all 'disloyal' elements and non-yes men.

[FORD]

SIEG OIL!!!

[ODShowtime]

Well, from a non-partisan business viewpoint, it is good to align a segment with it's corporate parent.

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by FORD
SIEG OIL!!!

How much oil have you used this year ??

[Nickdfresh]

Countdown to the next terrorist attack due to incompetent Bush hacks planted in the CIA.





Your Fired! Now get outta' my office!

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Countdown to the next terrorist attack due to incompetent Bush hacks planted in the CIA.

Unfortunately this is what I feel in my gut. It seems to me the plan is to get a nice yes-man in there for gw&friends.

This is usually not conducive to management effectiveness.

Also, engaging in a "purge" or re-organization during important initiatives (stopping the US from getting nuc'd) is usually not wise. This coupled with new management from the top down at the same time could lead to disaster.

What to do? Do not set yourself On Fire:

[Big Train]

A laugh riot this place is......you wanted changes made when we were discussing 9/11, how the departments failures meant people needed to be axed and now that it is happening we are back to the old chestnut of calling Bush Hitler...Pick a fucking path already...

[ELVIS]

Guess what, you liberal idiot...

Feelings are IRRATIONAL !!

What you "feel" in your gut or anywhere else in your wimpy little body means NOTHING !!!

Get a clue!

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Big Train
A laugh riot this place is......you wanted changes made when we were discussing 9/11, how the departments failures meant people needed to be axed and now that it is happening we are back to the old chestnut of calling Bush Hitler...Pick a fucking path already...

A partisan purge is not what I had in mind.

But wait, now I can be an intelligence officer again.

Everything is fine in Iraq. We're winning the war, really. Osama Bin Laden, we don't even think about him. I don't think we can really "win" the war on terror sir. And I swear an oath to Marshall Bush, glorious and fearless hero of the United States leading us to victory over the fascist terrorists.

See it's easy to get in now.

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Guess what, you liberal idiot...

Feelings are IRRATIONAL !!

What you "feel" in your gut or anywhere else in your wimpy little body means NOTHING !!!

Get a clue!

great, you respond to one post in a month and it's one I edited immediately. check out the rest and tell me I need a clue.

as nick put directly above, yes changes need to be made in the CIA. a partisan purge is not what I had in mind.

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by ODShowtime
great, you respond to one post in a month and it's one I edited immediately.

I rarely respond lately because there is nothing to respond to!

I read this forum throughout the day and I sit back and giggle at the liberal hatred...

You liberal freaks are a dying breed and thank God for that...

Real America is seeing the light, and my job is to make it that much brighter...

Trust me, I'm doing alot more than just arguing my points on a David Lee Roth message board...

Wake up!

[ODShowtime]

Well you are the mod here so it's pretty retarded to play the "I care less game" with me.

And to straighten you out, I see way more irrationality and hatred in your posts than in mine.

[John Ashcroft]

Oh, and I say, "it's about damn time the libs were purged of any and all positions of authority and/or responsibility." They've repetatively proven themselves inept.

[Nickdfresh]

I guess all of those nonterrorist attacks since 9/11 don't count. By the way, I heard Porter Goss was a shitty field agent.

[Big Train]

It is being made into a partisan purge. Bush wants changes the way he wants them, the Commander in Chief gets to make those calls. And that's fine, if thats the calls he feel need to be made.

As you appear to know something about the intelligence community Nick, enlighten me on what I need to know about the CIA.

I only can read the headlines for what they are worth..

[rustoffa]

Arrgh, any so-called "dismantling" of the CIA is nothing more than a public spin.

It's laughable.

[FORD]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Guess what, you liberal idiot...

Feelings are IRRATIONAL !!

What you "feel" in your gut or anywhere else in your wimpy little body means NOTHING !!!

Get a clue!

If that's true, then why did rednecks in 11 states cast ballots because they "feel" two gays getting married is a threat?

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Big Train
...As you appear to know something about the intelligence community Nick, enlighten me on what I need to know about the CIA.

I only can read the headlines for what they are worth.

I don't know much, but the first thing you need is people who will tell it like it is and not what they think you want to hear. I actually had hope that Goss would be a positive, but when anyone comes in and alienates his staff, that shows poor leadership, something that has plagued the CIA for many years now, since at least the Carter Administration. You can't manage a fast food restaurant with an attitude like that, much less an agency with highly educated specialists. It sounds as if they are trying to eliminate all bad news rather than remake a more effective spy agency.

Tenet was by no means a great director, but he seemed like he had a clue, but unfortunately not until after 9/11. I don't think the CIA is going to improve its biggest glaring weakness (human intelligence/HUMINT or actual stereotypical spying) when the guys quitting, or being pushed out, are specialists in HUMINT. The CIA lost a lot of experience today and I don't know how much they gained.

[FORD]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Guess what, you liberal idiot...

Feelings are IRRATIONAL !!

Now correct me if I'm wrong, because I've never had the need to go through the experience, but isn't one of the first lessons of Rehab that "Feelings are good"?

That it's healthy to feel things, whether they're good or not?

So does this mean you've become a Vulcan, or is this a sign of a relapse?

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by FORD
If that's true, then why did rednecks in 11 states cast ballots because they "feel" two gays getting married is a threat?

Show me where what you just described has any bearing on truth...

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by FORD
Now correct me if I'm wrong, because I've never had the need to go through the experience, but isn't one of the first lessons of Rehab that "Feelings are good"?

That it's healthy to feel things, whether they're good or not?

Feelings are important, but what I learned about feelings in rehab is that they are mostly selfish...

Me me me me me me me...

That's mainly the part of ME that I've changed...

[FORD]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Feelings are important, but what I learned about feelings in rehab is that they are mostly selfish...

Me me me me me me me...

That's mainly the part of ME that I've changed...

And isn't it just as selfish to say "I deserve civil rights, but these people over here don't, because I don't understand them. So I'll put the future of the entire country in the hands of incompetent criminals for another 4 years, rather than let that happen"

Now that sounds pretty damn selfish to me

[Big Train]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I don't know much, but the first thing you need is people who will tell it like it is and not what they think you want to hear. I actually had hope that Goss would be a positive, but when anyone comes in and alienates his staff, that shows poor leadership, something that has plagued the CIA for many years now, since at least the Carter Administration. You can't manage a fast food restaurant with an attitude like that, much less an agency with highly educated specialists. It sounds as if they are trying to eliminate all bad news rather than remake a more effective spy agency.

Tenet was by no means a great director, but he seemed like he had a clue, but unfortunately not until after 9/11. I don't think the CIA is going to improve its biggest glaring weakness (human intelligence/HUMINT or actual stereotypical spying) when the guys quitting, or being pushed out, are specialists in HUMINT. The CIA lost a lot of experience today and I don't know how much they gained.

Now as I understood it, we NEVER had great human intel in that part of the world, so who exactly are they pushing out? It seems to me to be a natural purge. For months you hear about the culture of the CIA, NSA and FBI all being horrible and non-productive. Now that Bush actually has a hand in making changes, it seems the choir wants to change it's tune to saying he is pushing people out based on politics. Again, I look for consistent statements and find few...

[Nickdfresh]

THE NATION
2 More Top CIA Officials Quit Over New Leadership

By Greg Miller, Times Staff Writer


WASHINGTON — The resignations of two more senior CIA officials Monday fueled debate in the intelligence community over whether the agency was tumbling into turmoil under new Director Porter J. Goss, or was taking painful but necessary steps toward fixing serious problems.

In the latest in a series of high-profile departures, the top two officials in the CIA's clandestine service quit after clashing with one of Goss' senior aides.

Stephen R. Kappes, the deputy director for operations, and his deputy, Michael J. Sulick, each had served in the agency for 23 years. Both are leaving just weeks into Goss' tenure, amid signs of increasing acrimony between the agency's old guard and what critics describe as an often-abrasive new regime.

The departures alarmed agency veterans, who said morale was plummeting under Goss' stewardship and that the agency was increasingly in disarray at a time when it was struggling to stay abreast of terrorist threats and the insurgency in Iraq.

Sen. John D. "Jay" Rockefeller IV of West Virginia, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, expressed concern that the drain of talent and ensuing confusion could spin out of control.

"Goss must take immediate steps to stabilize the situation at the CIA," Rockefeller said in a written statement. "There is no doubt that changes needed to take place at the CIA…. However, the departure of highly respected and competent individuals at such a crucial time is a grave concern."

Even some critics of Goss said they were dismayed by the agency's reaction to the arrival of its first new director in more than seven years. They accused senior CIA officials of seeking to undermine Goss and thwart his efforts to reform an agency accused of massive intelligence failures leading up to the Sept. 11 attacks and the war in Iraq.

Sources pointed in particular to damaging information that was leaked to the media about Goss' nominee for executive director of the agency, Michael V. Kostiw. Kostiw withdrew from consideration for the job after the Washington Post reported that he had left the CIA decades earlier after being accused of shoplifting. Kostiw remains a senior advisor to Goss.

Many people in recent years have talked of "how screwed up the CIA is, and somebody goes in to change things and suddenly it's the end of the world," said a longtime Goss associate who had spoken with the director's senior aides in recent weeks.

Kappes and other senior officers "completely cold-shouldered Porter Goss when he came in," said the former government official, who asked not to be identified. Now that President Bush has been reelected and it is clear Goss will not be a lame-duck at the agency, "the entrenched desk jockeys at the CIA — and the directorate of operations in particular — are going crazy," the former official said.

Some CIA critics argue that still more departures are necessary to bring to heel an agency that many Republicans accused of seeking to sandbag Bush during the presidential campaign by leaking information that warned of the deteriorating situation in post-war Iraq.

The agency's deputy director, John E. McLaughlin, announced his plans to retire Friday, and the CIA's former executive director, A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard, was forced out shortly after Goss arrived.

Another senior official, Michael Scheuer — the former chief of the agency's Osama bin Laden unit who wrote a book critical of the agency's terrorism response — quit last week; his departure apparently was unrelated to the new regime.

Goss did not address the turmoil at the agency in a written statement Monday, saying only that Kappes and Sulick had "honorably served their nation and this agency with distinction for many years."

Goss said: "There will be no gap in our operations fighting the global war on terror, nor in any of our other vital activities." He also indicated that a new head of the directorate of operations already had been selected. A U.S. intelligence official said Goss had chosen the head of the CIA's counter-terrorism center. The agency asked that the official's name not be published because he remained undercover.

Before arriving at the CIA in September, Goss was critical of the clandestine service, calling it "dysfunctional" and promising to overhaul it by thinning management and bureaucratic ranks at agency headquarters to bolster the number of operatives working overseas.

A former congressional aide familiar with Goss' plans said the CIA director would like to reverse a current ratio in which roughly one-third of those who worked in the clandestine service were overseas, while two-thirds were stationed at the agency's headquarters in Langley, Va.

Goss, a former Republican congressman from Florida, worked as a spy for the CIA in the 1960s. He has indicated that he intends to give station chiefs overseas greater autonomy and will seek to encourage greater risk-taking in mounting collection operations. Goss and his aides have said that the agency became too risk-averse during the 1990s.

Current and former CIA officials said they agreed with such goals and supported Goss' declaration during his first speech at the agency to stress fundamentals of the spying tradecraft.

But many current and former officials said that Goss' agenda was in danger of being derailed by growing animosity toward former congressional aides he brought with him to the agency and placed in high-level positions.

Intelligence officials said Kappes and Sulick did not resign in protest of a new policy or new direction for the directorate they led, but because of confrontations with Goss' chief of staff, Patrick Murray, who many accuse of having a brusque manner.

The officials said that the conflict with Murray came to a head during a recent meeting when Sulick challenged Murray in a face-to-face encounter, and Murray responded by ordering Kappes to fire or reassign his deputy. Kappes threatened Friday to resign over the incident, current and former officials said, but held off making a final decision until Monday, when he and Sulick both declared their intentions to retire.

Some of the acrimony between Goss' team and the directorate of operations stems from a harshly critical report of the CIA that Murray helped draft for the House Intelligence Committee this year.

The report, which was included in the annual intelligence authorization bill, warned that the CIA's vaunted spying network was headed over a "proverbial cliff" if reforms weren't adopted.

Former CIA Director George J. Tenet denounced the Goss report, and other agency officials warned that Goss would encounter hostility among the rank and file at the agency because of it.

The CIA has a reputation as being hostile toward — and adept at undermining — new leaders who were not in favor with the agency's spies.

"All of a sudden these guys who they can't stand are now out there running the show, and doing it in their usual, heavy-handed manner," said a former congressional official who worked with the House Intelligence Committee.

Kappes was formerly station chief in Moscow, and is widely credited with playing an instrumental role in persuading Libyan President Moammar Kadafi to give up his weapons programs this year.

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

A season of intrigue

The CIA has undergone numerous changes since the summer.

Here are the key events:

July 9: The Senate Intelligence Committee issues a report documenting what it calls sweeping and systemic failures of U.S. intelligence agencies leading up to the war on Iraq.

July 11: George J. Tenet, after seven years as CIA director, cites personal reasons in announcing his retirement.

July 19: Acting CIA Director John E. McLaughlin plays down any possible connection between Iran and the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

July 20: President Bush distances himself from McLaughlin's statements about an Iran connection, saying it is being investigated. The White House also says the CIA chief was not speaking for the president when McLaughlin said an intelligence czar was unnecessary.

July 22: The bipartisan National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States issues its final report, calling for the creation of a national intelligence director to oversee CIA, FBI and Pentagon intelligence operations. The Sept. 11 commission was particularly critical of the CIA's inability to gather intelligence and share it effectively with other agencies.

Aug. 23: Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, prompts an outcry when he proposes abolishing the CIA and folding all of the U.S. intelligence agencies' employees into a new National Intelligence Service.

Sept. 9: A senior Defense Department official tells the Senate Armed Services Committee that the CIA may have held as many as 100 "ghost" detainees in Iraq without disclosing their identities or locations. He said the CIA had repeatedly refused to cooperate with Pentagon investigators.

Sept. 24: Rep. Porter J. Goss, a former CIA case officer and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, is sworn in as director of central intelligence. A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard, the CIA's executive director, leaves soon after.

Nov. 12: McLaughlin, who briefly led the agency after Tenet retired, cites personal reasons in resigning. Michael Scheuer, former chief of the CIA's Osama bin Laden unit, resigns the same week.

Nov. 15: Stephen R. Kappes, the CIA's deputy director for operations, and his deputy, Michael J. Sulick, resign.



Source: Los Angeles Times

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Big Train
Now as I understood it, we NEVER had great human intel in that part of the world, so who exactly are they pushing out? It seems to me to be a natural purge. For months you hear about the culture of the CIA, NSA and FBI all being horrible and non-productive. Now that Bush actually has a hand in making changes, it seems the choir wants to change it's tune to saying he is pushing people out based on politics. Again, I look for consistent statements and find few...

They're not helping. Who are they bringing in? Change for the sake of change is NOT A GOOD THING.

[Denny]

[Nickdfresh]

I wonder if Denny is shitting his pants green?!? MUhuhawhawhawhawhawhawhawhawhawhawhawhawh....

[FORD]

I thought that fucking piece of shit was gone?

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by FORD
I thought that fucking piece of shit was gone?

I think he will be now, at least for a while. I sent him a couple of e-mails and he better heed me. I've got connections, friends in low places. He might find himself on a "watch list."

[Nickdfresh]

New C.I.A. Chief Tells Workers to Back Administration Policies
By DOUGLAS JEHL

Published: November 17, 2004

WASHINGTON, Nov. 16 - Porter J. Goss, the new intelligence chief, has told Central Intelligence Agency employees that their job is to "support the administration and its policies in our work,'' a copy of an internal memorandum shows.

"As agency employees we do not identify with, support or champion opposition to the administration or its policies," Mr. Goss said in the memorandum, which was circulated late on Monday. He said in the document that he was seeking "to clarify beyond doubt the rules of the road."

While his words could be construed as urging analysts to conform with administration policies, Mr. Goss also wrote, "We provide the intelligence as we see it - and let the facts alone speak to the policymaker.''

The memorandum suggested an effort by Mr. Goss to spell out his thinking as he embarked on what he made clear would be a major overhaul at the agency, with further changes to come. The changes to date, including the ouster of the agency's clandestine service chief, have left current and former intelligence officials angry and unnerved. Some have been outspoken, including those who said Tuesday that they regarded Mr. Goss's warning as part of an effort to suppress dissent within the organization.

In recent weeks, White House officials have complained that some C.I.A. officials have sought to undermine President Bush and his policies.

At a minimum, Mr. Goss's memorandum appeared to be a swipe against an agency decision under George J. Tenet, his predecessor as director of central intelligence, to permit a senior analyst at the agency, Michael Scheuer, to write a book and grant interviews that were critical of the Bush administration's policies on terrorism.

One former intelligence official said he saw nothing inappropriate in Mr. Goss's warning, noting that the C.I.A. had long tried to distance itself and its employees from policy matters.

"Mike exploited a seam in the rules and inappropriately used it to express his own policy views,'' the official said of Mr. Scheuer. "That did serious damage to the agency, because many people, including some in the White House, thought that he was being urged by the agency to take on the president. I know that was not the case.''

But a second former intelligence official said he was concerned that the memorandum and the changes represented an effort by Mr. Goss to stifle independence.

"If Goss is asking people to color their views and be a team player, that's not what people at C.I.A. signed up for,'' said the former intelligence official. The official and others interviewed in recent days spoke on condition that they not be named, saying they did not want to inflame tensions at the agency.

Some of the contents of Mr. Goss's memorandum were first reported by The Washington Post. A complete copy of the document was obtained on Tuesday by The New York Times.

Tensions between the agency's new leadership team, which took over in late September, and senior career officials are more intense than at any time since the late 1970's. The most significant changes so far have been the resignations on Monday of Stephen R. Kappes, the deputy director of operations, and his deputy, Michael Sulick, but Mr. Goss told agency employees in the memorandum that he planned further changes "in the days and weeks ahead of us'' that would involve "procedures, organization, senior personnel and areas of focus for our action.''

"I am committed to sharing these changes with you as they occur,'' Mr. Goss said in the memorandum. "I do understand it is easy to be distracted by both the nature and the pace of change. I am confident, however, that you will remain deeply committed to our mission.''

Mr. Goss's memorandum included a reminder that C.I.A. employees should "scrupulously honor our secrecy oath'' by allowing the agency's public affairs office and its Congressional relations branch to take the lead in all contacts with the media and with Congress. "We remain a secret organization,'' he said.

Among the moves that Mr. Goss said he was weighing was the selection of a candidate to become the agency's No. 2 official, the deputy director of central intelligence. The name being mentioned most often within the C.I.A. as a candidate, intelligence officials said, is Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden of the Air Force, the director of the National Security Agency, which is responsible for intercepting electronic communications worldwide. The naming of a deputy director would be made by the White House, in a nomination subject to Senate confirmation.

In interviews this week, members of Congress as well as current and former intelligence officials said one reason the overhaul under way had left them unnerved was that Mr. Goss had not made clear what kind of agency he intended to put in place. But Mr. Goss's memorandum did little to spell out that vision, and it did not make clear why the focus of overhaul efforts to date appeared to be on the operations directorate, which carries out spying and other covert missions around the world.

"It's just very hard to divine what's going on over there,'' said Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, who said he and other members of the Senate intelligence committee would be seeking answers at closed sessions this week. "But on issue after issue, there's a real question about whether the country and the Congress are going to get an unvarnished picture of our intelligence situation at a critical time.''

Mr. Goss said in the memorandum that he recognized that intelligence officers were operating in an atmosphere of extraordinary pressures, after a series of reports critical of intelligence agencies' performance in the months leading up to the Sept. 11 attacks and the war in Iraq.

"The I.C. and its people have been relentlessly scrutinized and criticized,'' he said, using an abbreviation for intelligence community. "Intelligence-related issues have become the fodder of partisan food fights and turf-power skirmishes. All the while, the demand for our services and products against a ruthless and unconventional enemy has expanded geometrically and we are expected to deliver - instantly. We have reason to be proud of our achievements and we need to be smarter about how we do our work in this operational climate.''

http://nytimes.com/2004/11/17/politi...rtner=homepage

[Nickdfresh]

Officials: CIA memo not an order to 'back Bush'
Agency, White House say director's message was misconstrued
From David Ensor
CNN
Wednesday, November 17, 2004 Posted: 10:19 PM EST (0319 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- CIA and White House officials said Wednesday that a memo from intelligence chief Porter Goss did not order his staff to "back Bush," as a newspaper headline put it Wednesday.

In a memo e-mailed to CIA staff Monday, Goss set out what he called "the rules of the road."

"We support the administration, and its policies, in our work as agency employees," he said. "We do not identify with, support or champion opposition to the administration or its policies. We provide the intelligence as we see it -- and let the facts alone speak to the policy-maker."

The quote was provided by an official in possession of the memo.

A CIA spokesman said the memo was "a statement about the nonpartisan nature of what this agency does," rather than the opposite.

"What that means," said CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano, "is when we are asked to provide intelligence on a particular topic, we do so without shading or shaping the information in any way. It is not a question of partisan support."

White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters that the e-mail was "misconstrued."

"The role of the CIA is intelligence gathering, intelligence analysis and intelligence dissemination. It is to provide policy-makers with the best possible intelligence. It's not to set policy."

He added, "The role of policy-makers is not to get involved with the CIA, either."

He said Goss sent the e-mail for two reasons: As a new director, he is committed to reforming intelligence gathering and to keeping his employees informed about changes.

However, a key Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Dianne Feinstein of California, said the contents of the memo "need to be explored."

"I think it was not an even-handed memo," Feinstein said in a statement. "As I look at the intelligence community, it should not 'support' or 'oppose' an administration. It should be professional, factual and give the best possible analysis, regardless of where the chips may fall."

The issue of politicization at the CIA has come to the forefront as Goss arrived to shake up the agency after being confirmed in September.

Some Democrats have questioned whether Goss, a former Republican congressman from Florida, will manage the agency in a nonpartisan manner. On the other hand, some Republicans have been critical of what they see as leaks from within the CIA designed to undermine President Bush during the recent election campaign.

Goss himself addressed the issue in his memo, according to quotes provided by officials who have read it:

"Intelligence-related issues have become the fodder of partisan food fights and turf power skirmishes," Goss said. "All the while, the demand for our services and products against a ruthless and unconventional enemy has expended geometrically, and we are expected to deliver instantly."

U.S. intelligence has "reason to be proud of our achievements," he said, but there is a "need to do better."

The existence of the Goss memo was first reported Tuesday in The Washington Post.

The New York Times ran a headline Wednesday saying, "Chief of CIA Tells His Staff to Back Bush."

"It is false," said one official, "quite baffling." The official called The New York Times headline "dopey."

The memo was e-mailed hours after the resignations of two top CIA officials over personality and policy disputes with staff members that Goss brought with him from Capitol Hill, where he served as House Intelligence Committee chairman. (Full story)

In the memo, Goss also told CIA staff that he will soon announce changes in "procedures, organization, senior personnel and areas of focus for our organization," according to officials who have read it.

But Feinstein said she was "disturbed" by news reports that Goss, at the urging of the White House, may be getting rid of people who are deemed liberal or disloyal to the president.

"If what is happening is vindictive, or even worse, a politically motivated purge, then I think that corrective action will need to be taken," she said in her statement. "It is critical that the CIA not be politicized, nor be encouraged to become allied with a particular political party or politician."

Goss said he was actively looking for a new deputy director to replace John McLaughlin, who announced Friday he will leave soon.

[Nickdfresh]

November 23, 2004

COMMENTARY
Newcomers' Chokehold on the CIA


By Thomas A. Twetten, Thomas A. Twetten was associate deputy director and then deputy director of operations at the CIA from 1988 through 1993.


The CIA and the intelligence community have been under close congressional oversight for about 30 years. This has sometimes saved the agency from momentary enthusiasms that could have gone badly awry. It has served as a healthy check on the executive branch. Even within the agency, most professionals recognize it as an important, if occasionally frustrating, reality.

But the political culture in Congress is robustly different from the apolitical, professional culture within the intelligence agencies. There is nothing wrong with either culture, but their different needs occasionally get in the way of healthy communication. Staffers of the congressional intelligence committees, for example, whose job is to keep watch over programs, priorities and funds, have been known on occasion to make reckless allegations about the CIA in order to get the ear of the member of Congress they serve.

This difference in attitudes can help explain the rocky start that my old friend Porter Goss, the former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee (with whom I trained as a new operations officer many years ago), has had as the new director of central intelligence. His biggest problem is that he brought with him from Congress four partisan staff members of the Intelligence Committee who have not adjusted from their old role as political advocates and critics. Instead, they are grabbing authority wherever they can and making decisions that should be left to the existing chain of command.

In only a few weeks, they have exhibited an arrogance that may have served them well on Capitol Hill but is inappropriate — and counterproductive — within the agency. Because the CIA is a secret agency, the turmoil caused by these four staffers is not particularly visible to the public, to the executive branch and to congressional supervisors. But turmoil it is.



Last week, for example, Goss' over-politicized staffers threatened senior CIA officers with demotion if they failed to stem leaks. And the New York Times published excerpts of a memo calling for CIA employees to "support the administration and its policies."

While fighting these unnecessary political battles, the director of central intelligence and his top staffers have failed to lay out their priorities. Briefings and organized programs have been offered up to the DCI on the nation's most pressing dangers and priorities, but his staff members have not responded. They're too busy settling scores with some senior employees who have stood up to them in the past. They're moving pals into plum positions and promoting those who appear to be malleable. The CIA meritocracy is in jeopardy.

There is plenty of room for change and improvement at the agency. Mistakes have been made in the past, and employees are eager to participate in reform (rather than having it imposed on them). Indeed, the workforce had been responding enthusiastically to the new focus of the recently appointed deputy director of operations, Stephen Kappes, and his No. 2, Michael Sulick. But Kappes and Sulick didn't last long; they were fired Nov. 15. Or to be more precise, Goss' aides provoked them into resigning. Why? Again, it was about politics, about punishing enemies and rewarding friends.

Intelligence officers, whatever their specialties, get better with years of experience. They deal with real people and complicated issues, and their ability to judge situations is better honed in 20 years than it is in two. The agency is a meritocracy, in which senior officers mentor middle-grade officers, who in turn teach the young. And it is a team, with a pride in accomplishments that will most likely (and preferably) remain unknown and unsung.

Goss and his minions can do a great deal of damage in short order. If the professional employees in the agency don't believe the agency's leadership is on their side, they won't take risks for it and, in the end, they won't stay.

There have occasionally been political directors of central intelligence before Goss, and no doubt there will be more in the future. The last one was Bill Casey, who was controversial in Congress. But within the agency, he was both controversial and beloved. His leadership was not a hug; it was tough. But he championed the workforce and its capabilities to contribute to the nation's security. He fought for the resources to get the job done.

The director of central intelligence is often the only political protection the workforce has. Right now, it appears to have none. I am not sure that the current DCI can recover from the wrong foot his partisan staff has put him on. But I can tell you one thing: He forced out the wrong fellows last week. I am urging CIA employees to stay on, to do their important work. It won't be easy, but it will take quality employees to put the agency back together when the staffers have gone.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/...,6015871.story

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
They're moving pals into plum positions and promoting those who appear to be malleable. The CIA meritocracy is in jeopardy.

Great. I feel a lot safer now.

[Nickdfresh]

Bush orders CIA paramilitary review
Tuesday, November 23, 2004 Posted: 11:55 AM EST (1655 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush has ordered a 90-day review of the feasibility of the Pentagon taking over responsibility for paramilitary operations now conducted by the CIA, senior Pentagon and administration officials told CNN Tuesday.

The proposal was one of the recommendations made by the commission that investigated the September 11, 2001, attacks.

Several senior Pentagon officials said the move was unlikely to happen and that the review's sole purpose was to demonstrate that the Bush Administration is taking the commission recommendations seriously.

An administration official said Bush ordered the review last week and declined comment when asked about the likelihood of the transfer.

The official said the study would involve the offices of the Attorney General, the Director of Central Intelligence, the Defense Department and the State Department.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has been unenthusiastic about making any change, as have several senior military officials.

CIA paramilitary operations are often some of the most covert, sensitive actions undertaken by the agency and can include so-called direct action, which may include attacks on specific targets.

CIA paramilitary forces were involved in the earliest stages of operations in Afghanistan and Iraq and also have operated secretly inside Pakistan searching for Osama bin Laden, according to U.S. military officials.

CNN's Barbara Starr and Elaine Quijano contributed to this report.