CIA DO Resignations

[Roguish Lawyer]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...ons/index.html

Top leaders of CIA's clandestine service resign
From David Ensor
CNN Washington Bureau

Monday, November 15, 2004 Posted: 1:11 PM EST (1811 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Steven Kappes and Michael J. Sulick, the top leaders of the CIA's directorate of operations, resigned Monday morning, sources told CNN.

Their departures come in a period of turmoil at the intelligence agency as the new director, Porter Goss seeks to impose his control.

The directorate of operations is the agency's clandestine service.

Kappes took over from James Pavitt, who left in August.

Deputy Director John McLaughlin, who ran the agency after Director George Tenet resigned earlier this year, announced his retirement Friday. He said he was leaving for personal reasons.

Michael Scheuer, the former head of the CIA's search for al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, quit Thursday.

In August, President Bush tapped Goss, a former CIA officer and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, to lead the agency. During his confirmation hearings, Goss pledged to apply "tough love" to the CIA.

Sources say Kappes and Sulick clashed with deputies Goss brought in from Capitol Hill, where he served as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee before being chosen by President Bush as director of central intelligence.

Top Republican lawmakers voiced support for new CIA Director Porter Goss on Sunday after the resignations of McLaughlin and Scheuer raised questions about a possible upheaval in the agency.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said such turnover was to be expected as new leadership takes over.

"The aggressiveness with which we will continue to fight the war on terror for freedom and liberty and democracy throughout the world will not be affected in any way by any sort of personnel changes here or any sort of reorganization of the intelligence functions of entities here," said Frist, a Republican from Tennessee.

But critics suggest Goss may be doing more harm than good with his efforts to reshape the nation's flagship spy agency. California Rep. Jane Harman, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, accused Goss of bringing a "highly partisan, inexperienced staff" with him when he took office in September.

"The agency seems in free-fall in Washington, and that is a very, very bad omen in the middle of a war," Harman said.

Harman said Goss has the right to make changes at the spy agency, but he needs "a management team in place that can help achieve objectives."

"To make those changes effectively, he has to do them with an experienced staff, and he doesn't have one," Harman said. "Many of us worked with that staff in the House. Frankly, on both sides of the aisle in our committee, we were happy to see them go."

Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican, called the CIA "a dysfunctional agency, and in some ways a rogue agency" that needed to be reformed. He accused some CIA insiders of leaking information to damage President Bush politically in the months before the election.

"Porter Goss is on the right track," McCain said on ABC's "This Week." "He is being savaged by these people that want the status quo, and the status quo is not satisfactory."

The CIA "is not providing the intelligence information necessary for the president to conduct the war on terror," he said.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, said the CIA "failed this country" with incorrect assessments of Iraq's weapons programs before the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003.

"I'm not worried about hurting people's feelings," said Graham, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. "I want to stand behind those who work hard. But if you got it wrong, you need to be dealt with."

Elaine Quijano contributed to this report.

[Airbornelawyer]

Far more even-handed than the hatchet job the Washington Post ran Saturday. The WaPo article was typical of the mutual back-scratching incestuous relationship of Beltway bureaucrats and the media.

[vsvo]

AL,

Good point. I read that Wash Post article. That's a hell of a price the media pays to maintain their "sources" who'll whisper leaks in their ear.

[NousDefionsDoc]

But critics suggest Goss may be doing more harm than good with his efforts to reshape the nation's flagship spy agency.

Well, it ain't like he's finger paintin' over the Mona Lisa to begin with. How much worse can it get?

[1026]

Is the CIA a liberal rat's nest like State? If so, this is probably a good deal.

[rubberneck]

Fox News had a former CIA analyist on last night and he spared no expense in blasting these cry babies. Apparently a great number of CIA officials have already quietly resigned, but that was to be expected because there are always resignations when a new director takes over.

He faults these clowns for crying to the media and being openly opposed to Bush. He even went so far as to be very critical of some of these officials for allowing a book to be written by an active operative that was openly critical of the President. It is their place to provide the CINC with intelligence not to take positions on his policies. Just another example of how badly Langley needs an enima.....

[rubberneck]

Originally Posted by NousDefionsDoc

Well, it ain't like he's finger paintin' over the Mona Lisa to begin with. How much worse can it get?

Its funny but during the past election cycle the Dems went out of their way to paint the CIA as a bunch of inept fools in desperate need of a house cleaning. Now that someone is actually doing what they demanded they now claim it is going too far. It gives me a headache. Figure out what the hell you want and then keep your firggin trap shut while good people get to work. I can't stand pols anymore.

[QRQ 30]

This part I can agree with:

Its funny but during the past election cycle the Dems went out of their way to paint the CIA as a bunch of inept fools in desperate need of a house cleaning.

How they got there is another story. I'm sure Carter had a lot to do with it. The lynching od Col Rheault was probably the beginning of the modern era de-fanging process. In reference to covert operations Carter said: "Gentlemen don't look in gentelmen's back windows." He neglected the very first premise that our enemies aren't gentlemen.

In Kosovo, the CIA authenticated all of their information and the POTUS, based upon their "expert info" bombed the Chinese Embassy instead of the bad guys. It turns out that the super spooks used an outdated map -- a rookie (Lt) mistake. I truly feel sorry for Colin Powell who went before the UN and presented totally false intel again based upon CIA reports. It'll take at least a decade but they need to be torn down and replaced. Perhaps they can be left in place until their replacement is in place and ready to go operational.

[Airbornelawyer]

Originally Posted by 1026

Is the CIA a liberal rat's nest like State? If so, this is probably a good deal.

It is not a question of liberal vs. conservative so much as bureaucratic inertia and comfort.

The Agency is comfortable with its bloated bureaucracy in Northern Virginia. Covert operators burn out quickly and in the modern world you don't have the derring-do of the Miles Copeland and Kermit Roosevelt era. But there are plenty of sinecures for analysts, especially for people more comfortable carping from the sidelines, Monday-morning quarterbacking, backseat-driving and metaphor-mixing over cocktails. And there are plenty of Washington Post reporters willing to share the cocktails and scratch backs in return for good leaks. Note the coverage - as Stephen Hayes of The Weekly Standard notes:

According to the Post, top advisers to Goss are "disgruntled" former CIA officials "widely known" for their "abrasive management style" and for criticizing the agency. One left the CIA after an undistinguished intelligence career and another is known for being "highly partisan."

On the other side, though, are disinterested civil servants: an unnamed "highly respected case officer," and Stephen Kappes, deputy director for operations "whose accomplishments include persuading Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi to renounce weapons of mass destruction this year."

In a piece entitled "How Dare They?," Jed Babbin, a former deputy undersecretary of defense, is even harsher:

Let's assume everything these guys are saying is true. That they are all highly-skilled professionals whose lives have been dedicated to doing an important job for their country. That they are the best we have to do this job, and their failures are not their fault. That Porter Goss and his principal staffers are arrogant idiots from Congress who not only lack any clue about what they're doing, but are abusive and disrespectful to the pros. And let's toss in the assumption, as the Post quotes one former senior CIA official, that "[t]here's confusion throughout the ranks and an extraordinary loss of morale and incentive." So what should these troubled professionals do?

If they were as professional as they profess, if they were as dedicated as they declaim, if they were the leaders they would lead us to believe, they would do a whole bunch of things. But not resign. That's the selfish, unprofessional, and -- yes -- unpatriotic thing to do. What you do is tough it out, fight for what's right, and do everything you can to straighten your boss out and repair what damage he does while still following orders.

In the hope that some of those who are thinking of resigning may read this, I want to address you directly. Each of you should ask yourself the following questions. Do you think your job is important to the war against terrorists and the nations that support them? Do you believe you're good at it, and are making a significant contribution to the nation's defense? Do you think that, by your hard work and experience, you may save one American's life or give the president one more option in any decision he has to make? Do you believe that your subordinates rely on your leadership and mentoring? If you answered any of those questions with a "yes," and you still dare to resign, you should hang your head in shame for the rest of your born days. It's all about duty, honor and country. If you think your personal gripes are more important, then go ahead and resign. And good riddance to you.

As they say in the blogosphere, read the whole thing.

[NousDefionsDoc]

Anytime somebody knocks them off their comfort zones, there will be wailing. Read about the R&A branch during WWII. The nature of the work requires them to be eggheads. The other thing is the DI works in the world of theory, and theorists tend to forget there is a difference.

They are as bad as tenured professors, because that is the world they come from and understand. They need a new Sherman Kent. They need to break out the old OSS files and look at what worked back then.

I would like to see General Boykin named DDI.

I would like to see the SOC take over the DDO.

The DCI needs to be a lion. No further political aspirations. Mission focused at any cost. He needs to sign his resignation later with no date and tell POTUS to sack him the minute he doesn't perform. Success or political suicide.

The Executive Branch needs to be reminded, in the harshest possible terms, that the intel is not there to support policy decisions already made. Anybody jigging an estimate should be publically disgraced, like Chuck Connors in "Branded". Metrics need to be established and enforced. Analysts need to be graded and held accountable for the accuracy of their estimates. Nobody gets tenure.

State needs to be scrapped and completely overhauled.

[Roguish Lawyer]

Originally Posted by NousDefionsDoc

State needs to be scrapped and completely overhauled.

Funny you should mention this, because you are SecState in my ps.com cabinet.

What exactly do you propose in this regard?

[NousDefionsDoc]

Fire everybody above the grade of GS-Secretary and most of them.

Start all over. Get them out of the CT business. The FTO list needs to be done by the Agency, not State.

I don't want to be SECSTATE! I want to be SECDEF.

[NousDefionsDoc]

Look at THIS!


Waaah! NOW he wants to start doing estimates on AQ?

[Roguish Lawyer]

Originally Posted by NousDefionsDoc

I don't want to be SECSTATE! I want to be SECDEF.

And let those diplomatic skills go to waste? Sorry. TR will be my SECDEF. He'll need to get a bigger place, though. All those new gadgets he'll be trying out personally, you know.

[Roguish Lawyer]

Chief of staff -- Team Sergeant
Treasury -- Greenhat
Intelligence Czar -- Airborne Lawyer
Press Secretary -- Guy LMAO!