Is this the old shell game?
Bob:
Did you Seymour Hirsch on CNN Friday or Saturday. He was followed by the Republican Senator from Georgia - Shelby (Mr. Bush can do no wrong)
Hirsch as you have read was concerned about Defense Department "intelligence" operations in Iran. Why, because the Defense Department is not subject to the same intelligence oversight as the CIA, NSA, etc.
Shelby came on and announced that the Defense Dept. Wants to create its own intelligence czar to head up all intelligence for all branches of the military. This would be separate from the newly approved national intelligence director proposed by the 9/11 commission.
Lou Dobbs seem baffled? He asked Shelby whether this was an end run around Congressional oversight. Shelby dodged the question and said Congress had itself to blame for not overseeing the intelligence establishment??? What the hell does that mean?
I guess all the clandestine CIA operatives will just get detailed to defense until the press drops this issue.
Did you Seymour Hirsch on CNN Friday or Saturday. He was followed by the Republican Senator from Georgia - Shelby (Mr. Bush can do no wrong)
Hirsch as you have read was concerned about Defense Department "intelligence" operations in Iran. Why, because the Defense Department is not subject to the same intelligence oversight as the CIA, NSA, etc.
Shelby came on and announced that the Defense Dept. Wants to create its own intelligence czar to head up all intelligence for all branches of the military. This would be separate from the newly approved national intelligence director proposed by the 9/11 commission.
Lou Dobbs seem baffled? He asked Shelby whether this was an end run around Congressional oversight. Shelby dodged the question and said Congress had itself to blame for not overseeing the intelligence establishment??? What the hell does that mean?
I guess all the clandestine CIA operatives will just get detailed to defense until the press drops this issue.
Comments
I read a long piece by Seymour Hersch in which he worried at length about this separate and growing Defense Department independent intelligence capability. His worry was that it would operate with little supervision by Congress. One question that occurs to me is "do I trust Barbara Boxer and Ted Kennedy to with our critical intelligence information about ongoing battles?" Honestly, for me, the answer is no.
For reasons that seem understandable to me, the Defense department got to the point that they do not trust the intelligence being provided by CIA. (Reason: CIA can't get anything right.)
The State Department bureaucracy (with the CIA as its ally) and Defense Department are at odds with one another on fundamental issues of the proper response to terrorism.
The Defense Department finds it alarming when members of the CIA leak confidential matters to the Press to apply political pressure to the President right before the election in the middle of sensitive operations in Iraq. In my judgment, the CIA is not elected and should be carrying out the policy of our elected civilian leaders, not running its own program at odds with that of the President.
It seems to me and to more than one Republican that while we are fighting a war with Terrorists, many people in the "loyal opposition" (and our "allies") may prioritize the political defeat of Bush higher than our actual military victory over the enemy. Comments by Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer, among others, make me wonder whose side they are on? Also in this category are many in the "mainstream" or "legacy" media.
I would like to believe that well intentioned Democrats and Republicans would put politics aside in favor of doing what is best for the Country and winning the war against the Islamic fascists. I would like to believe it, but I doubt it. Some Democrats seem to place the defeat of Bush as the absolute highest priority, above every other consideration, even national defense. Those people disqualify themselves from sensitive war intelligence.
___________________