Porter Goss turning the CIA into a GOP outcrop...UPDATE: Now with FULL TEXT of Memo

[conjur]

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash7.htm

GOSS URGES CIA EMPLOYEES TO SUPPORT BUSH POLICIES IN MEMO
Tue Nov 16 2004 21:18:43 ET

Porter 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 the internal memorandum shows.

The NEW YORK TIMES is planning to lead Wednesday's paper with the memo, newsroom sources tell DRUDGE.

MORE

"As agency employees we do not identify with, support or champion opposition to the administration or its policies," 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."

Developing...

It's best to have only one branch of government with no separation of powers. Eliminates all those messy restrictions imposed by the U.S. Constitution.



UPDATE: 11/19

Full statement of CIA Director Porter Goss to agency acquired by Raw Story
http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=438

Filed under: General? site admin @ 11:20 am Email This
The following is the text of the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) Porter Goss?s statement to agency staff dated Nov. 15 2004. RAW STORY acquired it from a source who prefers to remain anonymous, but has cross-checked the context of the statement with snippets that were printed in news articles such newspapers as the New York Times to verify its authenticity.

Not long after Director Tenet?s unexpected retirement, President Bush asked me to be the DCI and to take on the challenges identified in the various reviews of 9/11, in the reports about WMD, and in the global wear against terrorism. The President?s direction was very clear - the Intelligence Community must do all it can to keep Americans safe both here and abroad, and to accomplish that mission, the fifteen components of the Community must work more closely as a team.

As the flagship component, CIA has the vital role and the DCI has the direct responsibility and accountability to the President. I, and the DDCI on my behalf, perform that mission with your tremendous help.

CIA is, of course, a part of the Executive Branch primarily as a capabilities component. We do not make policy, though we do inform those who make it. We avoid political involvement especially political partisanship.

We are (emphasis in original) a secret Agency. Of necessity, we must assiduously follow the law to honor the trust placed upon us. We have rules to govern our conduct of business and rules designed to facilitate our mission?s success and to build public confidence.

Since 9/11 everything has changed. The IC and its people have been relentlessly scrutinized and criticized. 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.?

I want everyone in our workforce to know - I seek to encourage and expect the best from everyone in CIA. Our country demands it, our President needs it, and this institution deserves it. I also intend to clarify beyond doubt the rules of the road. We support the Administration and its policies in our work. As Agency employees 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 policymaker.

To do so we have a strong organizational framework to support the President and the nation. These roles and responsibilities are well established and I intend to follow them.

- DDCI: The DDCI is my critical partner in the leadership of the CIA and the Intelligence Community. We have been extraordinarily well served by our retiring friend and colleague John McLaughlin. We will all miss his steady thoughtful hand, his wonderful clarity, and his special magic. I wish you all to know that I am working to identify a candidate as my new deputy and take that to the President for his consideration.

- EXDIR: The Executive Director is the chief operating official for the CIA. I have entrusted him with the leadership of our critical functions, and the requirement that Mission comes first.

- The Deputy Directors for Intelligence, Operations, Science & Technology and the MSO Chiefs are the principal leaders of their disciplines, and are fully charged by me to lead their organizations, consistent with my vision and direction.

- Chief of Staff/DCI: The Chief of Staff organizes and manages the duties and priorities of my staff.

- The Directors of OPA, OCA, and OGC lead our Agency with contacts outside of the Agency. These disciplines allow us, as Agency officers to scrupulously honor our secrecy oath. A simple rule of thumb should always apply - all Agency business with the media or Congress should be conducted solely through these elements to ensure that we protect against the release of unauthorized documents, sources or methods. We remain a secret organization.

Through this clear chain of command we are all charged with not only our mission, but also the leadership of our officers with integrity, intelligence, and an unfailing commitment to the work the President has asked of us.

In the days and weeks ahead of us, I will announce a series of changes - some involving procedures, organization, senior personnel, and areas of focus for our action. I am committed to sharing these changes with you as they occur. I do understand it is easy to be distracted by both the nature and pace of change. I am confident, however, that you will remain deeply committed to our mission. The American people, and the President on their behalf, expect nothing less.

Now, go out there and win one for the Bushies!

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: conjur
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash7.htm

GOSS URGES CIA EMPLOYEES TO SUPPORT BUSH POLICIES IN MEMO
Tue Nov 16 2004 21:18:43 ET

Porter 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 the internal memorandum shows.

The NEW YORK TIMES is planning to lead Wednesday's paper with the memo, newsroom sources tell DRUDGE.

MORE

"As agency employees we do not identify with, support or champion opposition to the administration or its policies," 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."

Developing...

It's best to have only one branch of government with no separation of powers. Eliminates all those messy restrictions imposed by the U.S. Constitution.

GGGREEEAAATTT :roll:

"support the administration and its policies in our work,"

Isn't this one of the problems the Senate 9/11 commission said needed to be fixed?

 

[her209]

Damn those liberal elites.

 

[AcidicFury]

This is indeed scary. I always knew Porter Goss was a partisan hack. This just confirms it.

 

[conjur]

One God, One Party

 

[Bowfinger]

Bush and his minions better tread carefully. I suspect there are people in the CIA who have the means and the motive to make the Bush problem go away -- permanently, and with no evidence. They may consider themselves professionals and public servants, not political shills and corporate whores like Bush & Co. They might decide that protecting the United States Constitution falls within their job responsibilities, or at least their moral ones.

 

[Kibbo]

Although I agree that this is an unwise policy for the Bush administration, in principle an office of the executive branch should listen primarily to the chief executive.

I just don't know (well, I have ideas) why Bush would want to do this.

Only a fool wants to hear the sound of his own voice.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Kibbo
Although I agree that this is an unwise policy for the Bush administration, in principle an office of the executive branch should listen primarily to the chief executive.

I just don't know (well, I have ideas) why Bush would want to do this.

Only a fool wants to hear the sound of his own voice.

You answered your own question. < rimshot >

 

[DealMonkey]

The CIA is supposed to be apolitical. It would do a disservice to the principles of our intel community to simply support the party line.

 

[43st]

They had a little piece on this on NPR this morning. Pretty scary implications to make the CIA partisan agency. I bet the Anandtech GOP is bleating over this one.

 

[conjur]

Here's the full article:

New C.I.A. Chief Tells Workers to Back Administration Policies
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11...4&amp;partner=homepage

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.''

"Not that I'm telling you what to do, but, I'm telling you what to do."

 

[jlmadyson]

Timothy J. Roemer (D) 9/11 Commission member stated yestereday on C-Span that some of the changes Goss is attempting to make are some of the very changes reccomeneded in the 9/11 report. The Commissioner goes on to state that the CIA had no accountability for their failures leading up to 9/11. Further he stated that change is a must for the intelligence community. Granted I do not totally agree with Goss's management tact, but if by any means you think the CIA does not have liberal and conservative idealogues running around Langly then your living in another world. Change is sometimes for the better as the Commissioner points out.

 

[smashp]

wouldnt this be considered "building a barrier" for our intelligence services.

I thought we were supposed to be breaking them down.


So how long will it take for a GOP controlled CIA to send operatives into the ranks of the DNC to "Protect National Security"


haven't we somewhat been down this road before.....(cough .....wattergate......cough)

 

[kage69]

Sweet fvckin tapdancing jeebus that's disgusting. What is happening to my country?!

 

[tnitsuj]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Bush and his minions better tread carefully. I suspect there are people in the CIA who have the means and the motive to make the Bush problem go away -- permanently, and with no evidence. They may consider themselves professionals and public servants, not political shills and corporate whores like Bush &amp; Co. They might decide that protecting the United States Constitution falls within their job responsibilities, or at least their moral ones.

Hahahaha....you have been reading to many Ludlum novels and have no idea how the US intelligence community works.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Bush and his minions better tread carefully. I suspect there are people in the CIA who have the means and the motive to make the Bush problem go away -- permanently, and with no evidence. They may consider themselves professionals and public servants, not political shills and corporate whores like Bush &amp; Co. They might decide that protecting the United States Constitution falls within their job responsibilities, or at least their moral ones.

Hahahaha....you have been reading to many Ludlum novels and have no idea how the US intelligence community works.

Virtually every "apolitical" federal agency has a giant picture of the current president on the wall.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: jlmadyson
Timothy J. Roemer (D) 9/11 Commission member stated yestereday on C-Span that some of the changes Goss is attempting to make are some of the very changes reccomeneded in the 9/11 report. The Commissioner goes on to state that the CIA had no accountability for their failures leading up to 9/11. Further he stated that change is a must for the intelligence community. Granted I do not totally agree with Goss's management tact, but if by any means you think the CIA does not have liberal and conservative idealogues running around Langly then your living in another world. Change is sometimes for the better as the Commissioner points out.

No one is disputing that change is necessary. It's the other aspects of Goss that are highly questionable and downright scary.

 

[jlmadyson]

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Bush and his minions better tread carefully. I suspect there are people in the CIA who have the means and the motive to make the Bush problem go away -- permanently, and with no evidence. They may consider themselves professionals and public servants, not political shills and corporate whores like Bush &amp; Co. They might decide that protecting the United States Constitution falls within their job responsibilities, or at least their moral ones.

Hahahaha....you have been reading to many Ludlum novels and have no idea how the US intelligence community works.

Do I hear Shadow Govt? lol, You know that is one theory behind the Kennedy assassination.

 

[kage69]

No one is disputing that change is necessary. It's the other aspects of Goss that are highly questionable and downright scary.

Exactly. It seems many Dems were right in fearing Goss to be too partisan for the job. This, quite frankly, is bullsh!t.

 

[jlmadyson]

Originally posted by: conjur
I am calling for 4-6% popular vote win and a good 40 EV win. (in favor of Kerry)

Love this. hehe

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: jlmadyson
Timothy J. Roemer (D) 9/11 Commission member stated yestereday on C-Span that some of the changes Goss is attempting to make are some of the very changes reccomeneded in the 9/11 report. The Commissioner goes on to state that the CIA had no accountability for their failures leading up to 9/11. Further he stated that change is a must for the intelligence community. Granted I do not totally agree with Goss's management tact, but if by any means you think the CIA does not have liberal and conservative idealogues running around Langly then your living in another world. Change is sometimes for the better as the Commissioner points out.

There is a huge difference between agency ideologues interpreting intel and an administration that purges all but one ideology from an agency.

Is there an echo in here...in here...in here...?

This is a formula for producing useless garbage packaged as intel.

 

[BBond]

PS

Just look at the debauchery of the intel used by Bush to justify his unprovoked invasion of Iraq. Now imagine what atrocities he'll be able to commit with the intel he gets carrying his own brand label.

 

[jlmadyson]

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: jlmadyson
Timothy J. Roemer (D) 9/11 Commission member stated yestereday on C-Span that some of the changes Goss is attempting to make are some of the very changes reccomeneded in the 9/11 report. The Commissioner goes on to state that the CIA had no accountability for their failures leading up to 9/11. Further he stated that change is a must for the intelligence community. Granted I do not totally agree with Goss's management tact, but if by any means you think the CIA does not have liberal and conservative idealogues running around Langly then your living in another world. Change is sometimes for the better as the Commissioner points out.

There is a huge difference between agency ideologues interpreting intel and an administration that purges all but one ideology from an agency.

Is there an echo in here...in here...in here...?

This is a formula for producing useless garbage packaged as intel.

Pick up a Robert Baer novel or 2. You would be amazed by the intellingence produced by idealuouges throughtout the 80s and 90s on both sides of the picture. As I stated earlier I do not agree with Goss's management style. At this point the case points that he is lacking in hearing out counter opinions. I do agree on this.

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: jlmadyson

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: jlmadyson
Timothy J. Roemer (D) 9/11 Commission member stated yestereday on C-Span that some of the changes Goss is attempting to make are some of the very changes reccomeneded in the 9/11 report. The Commissioner goes on to state that the CIA had no accountability for their failures leading up to 9/11. Further he stated that change is a must for the intelligence community. Granted I do not totally agree with Goss's management tact, but if by any means you think the CIA does not have liberal and conservative idealogues running around Langly then your living in another world. Change is sometimes for the better as the Commissioner points out.

There is a huge difference between agency ideologues interpreting intel and an administration that purges all but one ideology from an agency.

Is there an echo in here...in here...in here...?

This is a formula for producing useless garbage packaged as intel.

Pick up a Robert Baer novel or 2. You would be amazed by the intellingence produced by idealuouges throughtout the 80s and 90s on both sides of the picture. As I stated earlier I do not agree with Goss's management style. At this point the case points that he is lacking in hearing out counter opinions. I do agree on this.

It was intel produced by ideologues, as you said, "on both sides of the picture".

A president can choose which ideology he follows. The difference in Bush's purge of the CIA is, there will be only one ideology in control. Only one course to follow.

A recipe for disaster.

Or in Bush's case, to be precise, more disaster, because he has been following only one ideology. The insane neocon ideology of PNAC.

 

[phillyTIM]

We all knew the Government would be nothing more than Bush/Cheney puppets should he be re-elected.

The prophecy has been fulfilled.