The CIA revolt against the White House

[CatWoman]

Jan. 23, 2004 | In President Bush's State of the Union address, national security was a core theme, and with good reason: Recent polls show Bush enjoys far more popular support for his aggressive foreign policy and terror-fighting tactics than on domestic issues. Undoubtedly, the president's reelection campaign will tout two swift, decisive military victories in Afghanistan and Iraq, and argue the homeland is more secure since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

But for almost a year, the White House has been quietly fighting a contentious battle at home on the national security front -- against the U.S. intelligence community itself. Vocal retired intelligence officials, and anonymous active ones, have protested repeatedly that the White House has coerced intelligence agencies to rig findings and analysis to suit administration aims. An egregious example: The long-held goal of removing Saddam Hussein from power, by unilateral war if necessary. The consequences of such White House intimidation could be disastrous, the intelligence veterans say, with the integrity of their work -- and national security -- put at grave risk.


The latest salvo was launched this week when a group of respected former CIA officials, led by decorated analyst Larry C. Johnson, sent a letter to Republican Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert demanding that Congress hold the White House accountable for deliberately revealing the identity of undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame. Johnson, who also served as deputy director for the State Department's Office of Counter Terrorism, says the administration's political tactics are clear. "With this White House, I see an outright pattern of bullying," he told Salon in an interview Thursday. "We've seen it across different agencies, a pattern of going after anybody who's a critic. When people raise legitimate issues that may not be consistent with existing administration policy, those people are attacked and their character is impugned."


http://salon.com/news/feature/2004/01/23/johnson/index.html

[Ilsa]

1. If only

the military could revolt against Commander Bunnypants, there might be some sanity left in the world.

[Martin Eden]

2. We need more to come forward like Larry C. Johnson

He's a former intelligence professional and a registered Republican who gave money to Bush, but doesn't hesitate to come forward when he sees this administration's reckless and vindictive behavior.

Here's his concluding statement in this Salon interview:

Moreover, the war on Iraq was a complete diversion from the war on terrorism. The Bush administration continues to tout that it was central to the war on terrorism, but that's just flat out wrong. They can keep saying that, they can keep claiming every day that the moon is made of green cheese, but just saying it doesn't make it true. The fact of the matter is, the terrorist threat we face, the one that causes the greatest danger to U.S. citizens, is from Muslim extremists. Up until we invaded, Iraq remained one of the most secular countries in the Middle East. We've now managed to take that country and set it on a road that could easily lead toward Muslim extremism.

If that's a success in the war on terrorism, I don't get it.

[nightperson]

3. Thanks for posting this.

This ongoing story is so damning to the Bush crew, and just keeps dragging on, with certainly nasty consequences for all of us. Imagine the effect this has on CIA morale, let alone recruitment, and thus on national security. Amazing. Not to mention it's another Bush problem that breeds paranoia and conspiracy theories. What a mess. No wonder so many Republicans like Kevin Phillips have had it up to here :mad: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :grr: with the whole sorry Bush clan.

[CHIMO]

4. Hope The

System has built in protection.

[kaitykaity]

5. Dubya pissed off the spooks. I wonder why Poppy

didn't tell Junior how stoopid that was.
:shaking head in disbelief:.

[Snappy]

6. Arrogance in the extreme

This Dubya gang is imploding. Pissin' on the CIA and pissin' 'em off is not wise.

[JoblessRecovery]

7. Dubya is a stooge - I doubt he knew about it

I suspect it was Cheney or Rove that did the dirty work and the stooge is helping them cover it up now by refusing to take responsibility for it.

[teryang]

8. This is a cover their ass tactic

...by the CIA. The CIA is in this up to their eyeballs. There is a difference between the analysts and the operators. The analysts are a front who provide plausible deniability. These people often actually know what they are talking about and give good advice. And they are often ignored while the operators do the dirty deeds and tricks the analysts would never recommmend.

The retired operators are conducting a rear guard action whose purpose is also plausible deniability to save the reputation of the agency when the inevitable power change and reaction sets in to all the crimes this regime has committed. They remember Frank Church and they are trying to build a shield now. The agency is involved with the bin laden organization up to their eyeballs and helped them to escape in Afghanistan. The CIA promotes terror via third party intelligence agencies like the ISI. They were probably involved in 911.

[Snappy]

9. CIA promoted 911?

The PNAC crowd stated a "Pearl Harbor" was needed in order for the USA to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. Is this what the CIA provided?
Is Osama actually a deep cover CIA agent provacatuer? Perhaps the members of Al Q. are completely unaware of Osama's actual misssion?
Is his group Al Q. a vehicle to help foment fear for the West in order for the New World Order to garner control of Globalizing the Multi-Corp domination of all the countries of the planet?

[PATRICK]

10. Why give them credit?

All they had to do was maintain their focus on political exploitation, PNAC agenda and letting everything else peripheral to their course(like national security) degenerate to the inevitable.
But they knew plenty to save their own skins and poise themselves to take advantage.

I think, putting 911 in a larger context, you can see them lining up like a football team whenever they have expectations of a terrorist attack, capture of someone or some other event or diplomatic coup(those have been few indeed!). Often events were foiled or nothing happened. They awkwardly disband, advantages slipping away, until the next time, when unscrutinized by anyone with a modicum of intelligence or responsibility in government or the press, these buzzards circling in the air smelled another opportunity coming.

These are not geniuses or cabalists constantly meeting and hatching out intricate plots, though advantage and future dominance is their heart and soul agenda. They are predators pure and simple, and simple and focused is their need. Nothing else is their concern and therefore everything else falls apart- and that is fine because their ship just floats higher than the sinking wrecks.

The CIA structurally was made into a disparate bunch of compartments, some heavily compromised and exploited in service of people like Bush, an anti-Dem ethos as in the military, and some incestuous connections outside the agency with the GOP, GOP businesses and criminal connections. Incredibly, as with the population, unless blinded and stampeded and in the thrall of duty the vast majority are working for us. The "black" CIA within the CIA may be largely myth, but there are names of people committing crimes, harming our country. Why enlarge these petty crooks into some dark great ingenious force? A purge wouldn't hurt so much now as it did in the Cold War when we were looking for a single double agent.

[ozymandius]

11. Of course, it also depends on which CIA you're talking about.

Do you mean the much touted Office of Special Plans? Or regular CIA ops? Or are these people in the organizations that may have a personal agenda. I am highly suspicious of any notion that establish culpability traceable by internal memos indicating standard policy procedure.

[Snappy]

12. One one burden

Now David Kay says that the CIA should apologize to the Pres. for providing faulty intell re: Iraq's WMDs. Is the CIA going to bend over on this, as well?