[Mb-civic] Cheney Cat's Paw, Porter Goss, as CIA Director?

[Michael Butler]

Editor's Note | Despite bipartisan distaste for the choice, George W. Bush
has tapped the Republican Congressman from Florida, Porter Goss, to replace
George Tenet as Director of the CIA. Goss is a known ally of the Bush
administration, and has loyally carried water for the White House on issues
ranging from the September 11 attacks to the Iraq invasion.

 We at truthout are deeply concerned by this choice for two reasons. Our
first concern centers on the blatantly political nature of this nomination.
Karl Rove, Bush's masterful political consigliore, is adept at placing
divisive issues at the forefront of election seasons. Goss is a poor choice
for CIA Director, for several reasons, yet Democrats raising legitimate
concerns about him will almost certainly be labeled obstructionists. The
vital question of who will lead the CIA will become enmeshed in
election-year nonsense arguments. We are hopeful that opposition to this
poor choice will be bipartisan in nature, so as to blunt the inevitable
accusations from the Bush camp.

 We at truthout are also concerned that so profound an ally of the Bush
administration is poised to take the reins of the CIA while the
investigation of the Valerie Plame case is still ongoing. Our readers will
recall that Plame was a CIA agent allegedly 'outed' by administration
officials in order to silence her husband, Bush critic Ambassador Joseph
Wilson. The case is progressing - Patrick Fitzgerald is re-questioning
witnesses, members of the media are facing jail time as a federal judge is
requiring their testimony before the Grand Jury, and Mr. Bush himself has
hired a criminal attorney - and we fear a new Director so closely connected
with the administration will hinder this important matter.

 We ran the story below on July 3rd. Ray McGovern is a veteran analyst for
the CIA, and is deeply troubled by the choice of Goss. His concerns are
well-founded. ­ wrp

    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.

  

  -------

   Jump to TO Features for Wednesday August 11, 2004   


 © Copyright 2004 by TruthOut.org