Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Am Prospect: "The Yes Man" - How Porter Goss has all but destroyed the CIA

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 09:27 PM
Original message
Am Prospect: "The Yes Man" - How Porter Goss has all but destroyed the CIA
Edited on Mon Oct-24-05 09:53 PM by Nothing Without Hope
This article is the cover story for the November issue of The American Prospect:



This is an absolute must-read and another reason why the Bush Administration has made this country far less safe for long years to come, even if it is forced out of office by people who actually dwell in the reality-based community.

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=10472

The Yes-Man


President Bush sent Porter Goss to the CIA to keep the agency in line. What he’s really doing is wrecking it.
By Robert Dreyfuss
Issue Date: 11.23.05

(snip)

This article, based on more than two-dozen interviews with former intelligence officials from the CIA, the Pentagon, and the State Department, along with ex–Capitol Hill intelligence staffers who worked with Goss, is the first comprehensive account of the CIA’s transition from George Tenet through John McLaughlin, the agency’s respected acting director in mid-2004, to Goss. It reveals that Goss may have put the final nail in the coffin of an agency whose expertise and analytical skills were cavalierly overridden by a White House obsessed with Saddam Hussein. From 2001 on, its covert operatives and analysts were ignored, pressured, and forced to toe the administration’s line; neoconservative ideologues considered those operatives to be virtually part of the enemy camp. Many of those who remain inside the CIA are distraught, convinced that their work is wasted on an administration that doesn’t want to hear the truth. “How do you think they feel?” asked one recently retired CIA officer with three decades of experience. “They’re watching a fucking idiotic policy, run by idiots, unfold right before their eyes!”

(snip –the meat of the report is in this section)

On the seventh floor at Langley, Goss is reportedly isolated. His staff protects him from agency veterans. It is said that he doesn’t walk the halls or mix readily with the troops, doesn’t eat in the CIA cafeteria, and gets chilly stares from employees. Many of them are angry that Goss has quietly allowed Negroponte to usurp traditional CIA roles, such as briefing the president on daily intelligence. “He’s seen as a weak leader, not as an advocate,” says one recently retired Middle East CIA officer. “So the agency is losing its position of influence.” Having clashed early with the Directorate of Operations, Goss has alienated -- some say irreparably -- the heart of the CIA: its clandestine service. “Without the , the CIA is the Brookings Institution with razor wire,” says one former agent. Another adds: “The won’t forgive Goss. With the , you are either an ‘us’ or a ‘them.’ With the start Goss made, he was firmly placed in the ‘them’ category.”

Chas W. Freeman is a former assistant secretary of defense and U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia under the first President Bush. “What Goss is doing is an effort that originated outside the agency to impose a vision on it that its analysts and operatives reject as simply not based on reality,” he says. “It’s totalitarian. We are going to end up with an agency that is more right-wing, more conformist, and less prone to produce people with original views and dissenters.”

Demoralized, weakened, and politicized, the CIA may yet recover. The agency, particularly the Directorate of Operations, has weathered storms before and knows how to hunker down. Goss will probably not remain at the helm for long. And despite him, the agency continues to produce reports on the U.S. predicament in Iraq that reflect a measure of reality-based pessimism. But there is anger, bitterness, and an unhealthy caution that ill serves America’s need for an agency that, as one former CIA officer says, “speaks truth to power.” Enormous damage has been done, and the rebuilding of the CIA will take many years after Goss departs.


Robert Dreyfuss is a Prospect senior correspondent. He covers national security for Rolling Stone and writes frequently for The Nation and Mother Jones. His book, Devil’s Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam, was published this fall by Henry Holt/Metropolitan.

***********************

The same author wrote a related article in The American Prospect last month:

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=10394

Tenet's Revenge


Porter Goss can't afford to rattle any more skeletons at the CIA.
By Robert Dreyfuss
Web Exclusive: 10.07.05

There’s no reason why Porter Goss, the embattled director of the CIA, can’t declassify and make public the agency’s internal investigation of its less-than-stellar counterterrorism accomplishments before September 11. And there’s no reason why Goss can’t reprimand any current or former CIA officers, including former Director George Tenet, if they deserve it. (Whether they in fact deserve it depends at least in part on what the report says.) But he won’t.

The report, written by the CIA’s inspector general, was commissioned by Congress in December 2002 and delivered to Congress last summer. Democrats, sensing yet another opportunity to tar George W. Bush with the intelligence community’s failures, would love to have it made public -- but Goss, and Republicans on the congressional intelligence committees, are content to sit on it. Since it was delivered, Goss has declared his opposition to releasing the report to the public, even in redacted form. Then, on Wednesday, the CIA announced that no disciplinary action would be taken against any of the 20 past and present CIA officials reported to have come under criticism in the report.

But there are several hidden crosscurrents at work.

First, since taking over at the CIA a little more than a year ago, Goss has wreaked havoc on an agency that has been considered enemy territory by the Pentagon and its neoconservative allies for the past four years. Since going to Langley, Goss -- carrying water for the White House, which blamed the CIA for resisting its pressure to support the war in Iraq in 2002-03 and for refusing to drink the administration’s Kool-Aid and engage in happy talk about the Iraqi insurgency during the 2004 election season -- has shredded much of the agency’s core capabilities, forcing many senior officers into retirement or exile. He is, according to insiders’ accounts, isolated from the agency’s top officials, holed up in his executive suite at Langley and surrounded by a snarling staff of former House aides who accompanied him to the CIA. As a result, Goss has no political capital left at the CIA, and he can ill afford to take gratuitous actions that would further alienate the CIA’s professionals.

(snip)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 09:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. That was predictable...
Yet another shameless hack to advance a political agenda, not to make an agency more effective.
It's going to take decades to recover from the damage this administration has done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. Well, it's only been a few years....
My point all along has been that the CIA has been pissed on for long enough.

We all know that the CIA's agents have been telling the real truth about Iraq WMD's all along.

I think these CIA hardcore veterans see a real threat in Shrub. And they never wanted any kind of partisan leader. Tenet was bad enough. Now they have to put up with Goss, a man who's said he wasn't capable of the job.

And now it's payback time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ToolTex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 09:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. Porter Goss has FEMAed CIA.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Exactly. Two major government agencies responsible for national security
and both have been gutted, the management replaced with head-nodding delusional neocon-activated robots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Was Porter Goss such a neocon, or was he a bushite?
Sorry, I don't know much about the man.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. The article lays it all out. His primary function was to make the CIA a
Edited on Mon Oct-24-05 09:49 PM by Nothing Without Hope
Bush team player as opposed to a provider of actual, factual intelligence. As the article puts it: His immediate goal in 2004 was to block what had been, until then, a stream of damaging leaks of information about CIA intelligence reports that ran contrary to the White House’s rosy optimism about Iraq and U.S. anti-terrorism efforts.

Very much along the lines of what Scowcroft and Wilkerson and others before tham have said about the Bush Administration wanting only selective bits that fit its own ideological objectives and rejecting reality. Propaganda and lies, in other words. Either you support the Bush Administration view of what is happening in the world, however false, or you are stonewalled or out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. The CIA has always been at the disposal of a President
How is this different? is it just the blockage of true information?
Or is it just the "loyalty" thing gone haywire?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. I'd say
that it is a loyalty thing...Like Hitler, there must be loyalty above all else--so they need individuals to fit the analysis with whatever agenda they got cooked up. Agents have left in disgust--others probably staying to see what happens. Also, probably weakening the CIA for the next SS, I mean OSP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbieinok Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #7
30. Bismarck made sure the ambassadors etc sent him accurate info
from the countries they were assigned to......he wanted to know the mood etc of other countries before he took any action; he wanted to know what was real

Hitler reorganized foreign affairs so that he got info that agreed with his preconceived notions......I think he was told by people in both England and the US that those 2 countries would do nothing no matter what he himself did; this is what Hitler already believed about them, and his 'gang' made sure he did not receive any info contradicting his already formed beliefs

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I wouldn't put it that way, but you're right
Edited on Mon Oct-24-05 09:41 PM by Canuckistanian
FEMA is an agency that is much younger and less-established.

But you're correct in saying that politics has destroyed any effectiveness in those two organisations.

Of the two, I'd say the CIA is still intact in its basic goals and ideology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 09:43 PM
Response to Original message
6. The first sentence of the article indicates that this was DELIBERATE:
Edited on Mon Oct-24-05 09:43 PM by Nothing Without Hope
"Exactly as intended, Porter Goss has hit the Central Intelligence Agency like a wrecking ball."

This would suggest it bears some resemblance to Boltoning the UN.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleClarkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. It was retribution for not supporting Bush in the Iraq War
and not supporting him during the campaign. The "Liberal Democrats" in the CIA (see also "those who dissented from White House opinion") were purged, and those who were left told to support WH policies, as if that was their function as opposed to telling the truth.

Oh yeah, it was deliberate. This administration never did want to hear the truth, and smears anyone who dares try to tell it to them if it doesn't match their theories.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ToolTex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #6
25. Of course it was/is deliberate. FEMA was deliberate. NPR is deliberate.
Education is deliberate. Et cetera. It is their way. They can't debate it, as is usual in a democracy, because they would lose. So they simply make it unworkable while claiming to be improving. Same effect as eliminating it.

Boltoning the UN. Exactly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #6
29. This is their pattern, isn't it?
"All foxes immediately report the the henhouse."

Thanks for the heads up, I want to read this. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 09:50 PM
Response to Original message
9. wow -it is online!
bookmarked for reading later. the cia for at least a year and half has been waging a war with the whitehouse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Thanks for this confirmation - I've removed my sentence about it maybe
not being available yet to nonsubscribers.

:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 10:01 PM
Response to Original message
13. Peter Goss has FEMA'd Peter Goss. The CIA will make sure of that, ...
... in the end.

Bye, bye Peter .....


Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
14. Hey! What's the big CIA questions today?
Was Valerie Plame REALLY a covert agent?

What is the CIA's basic position on the case?

What are the tue basic mission of the CIA presently?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 10:38 PM
Response to Original message
15. The gutting of the CIA is one more aspect of what Scowcroft & Wilkerson
Edited on Mon Oct-24-05 10:40 PM by Nothing Without Hope
said:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5152016
thread title: New Yorker/ Goldberger: "Breaking Ranks" - SCOWCROFT's BLAST OF BUSH 43

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 11:10 PM
Response to Original message
16. kick n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 12:04 AM
Response to Original message
18. kick n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 04:14 AM
Response to Original message
19. kick n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemReadingDU Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 08:17 AM
Response to Original message
20. Recommended
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
21. kick - this article contains information that needs to be added to our
research files. I'd like to see it get one more vote so people will see it on the Greatest page. Otherwise, it's basically almost invisible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
22. the destruction of the CIA - sounds like a good thing to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
23. kick - think how much damage could have been avoided with a
Edited on Tue Oct-25-05 02:07 PM by Nothing Without Hope
functioning CIA - what would Valerie Plame and the other agents working through Brewster-Jennings have been able to find about Middle East WMDs? But the Administration wanted to HIDE facts and advance their propaganda.

Porter Goss was sent to the CIA to destroy it as a true intelligence-gathering organization and convert it to another department of the propaganda mill and enforcer of Bushie whims.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmatthan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 02:33 PM
Response to Original message
24. Remember , it was with the help of Dem. Bob Graham
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 06:11 PM
Response to Original message
26. Kick n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bonito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 07:38 PM
Response to Original message
27. Kick!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
28. No surprise there. That was the POINT of appointing him. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 04:31 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC