Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

CIA in Chaos
Quote | Reply
Looks like Goss is doing as supremely good a job of dividing the CIA as Bush is the country.

Deputy Chief Resigns From CIA
Agency Is Said to Be in Turmoil Under New Director Goss

By Dana Priest and Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, November 13, 2004; Page A01



The deputy director of the CIA resigned yesterday after a series of confrontations over the past week between senior operations officials and CIA Director Porter J. Goss's new chief of staff that have left the agency in turmoil, according to several current and former CIA officials.

John E. McLaughlin, a 32-year CIA veteran who was acting director for two months this summer until Goss took over, resigned after warning Goss that his top aide, former Capitol Hill staff member Patrick Murray, was treating senior officials disrespectfully and risked widespread resignations, the officials said.

Yesterday, the agency official who oversees foreign operations, Deputy Director of Operations Stephen R. Kappes, tendered his resignation after a confrontation with Murray. Goss and the White House pleaded with Kappes to reconsider and he agreed to delay his decision until Monday, the officials said.

Several other senior clandestine service officers are threatening to leave, current and former agency officials said.

The disruption comes as the CIA is trying to stay abreast of a worldwide terrorist threat from al Qaeda, a growing insurgency in Iraq, the return of the Taliban in Afghanistan and congressional proposals to reorganize the intelligence agencies. The agency also has been criticized for not preventing the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and not accurately assessing Saddam Hussein's ability to produce weapons of mass destruction.

"It's the worst roiling I've ever heard of," said one former senior official with knowledge of the events. "There's confusion throughout the ranks and an extraordinary loss of morale and incentive."

Current and retired senior managers have criticized Goss, former chairman of the House intelligence committee, for not interacting with senior managers and for giving Murray too much authority over day-to-day operations. Murray was Goss's chief of staff on the intelligence committee.

Transitions between CIA directors are often unsettling for career officers. Goss's arrival has been especially tense because he brought with him four former members of the intelligence committee known widely on the Hill for their abrasive management style.

Three are former mid-level CIA officials who left the agency disgruntled, according to former colleagues. The fourth, Murray, who also worked at the Justice Department, has a reputation for being highly partisan. When senior managers have gone to Goss to complain about his staff actions, one CIA officer said, Goss has told them" "Talk to my chief of staff. I don't do personnel."

The overall effect, said one former senior CIA official, who has kept up his contacts in the Directorate of Operations, "is that Goss doesn't seem engaged at all."

If other senior clandestine officers leave, said one former officer who maintains contacts within the Langley headquarters, "the middle-level people who move up may eventually work out, but meanwhile the level of experience and competence will go down."

The CIA declined to comment on the issues raised by the current and former officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. A CIA spokesman said McLaughlin's retirement "was a long-planned personal decision taken at a natural transition point in the administration and not connected to any other factors."

McLaughlin issued a statement that said: "I have come to the purely personal decision that it is time to move on to other endeavors."

Goss, too, issued a statement, which applauded McLaughlin's "outstanding service."

"On a personal note," the statement continued, "I want to thank John for the kindness he has shown me as Director of Central Intelligence."

In addition to bringing in his former aides from the Hill, Goss plans to dilute the authority of the Directorate of Operations by removing the director as the central figure in appointing country station chiefs overseas and regional division chiefs at headquarters.

"I definitely think all this is disrupting people's work," one agency official said. "Everyone is waiting for the centipede to drop all his shoes."

Associates said McLaughlin was disappointed by Goss's management style and was particularly disheartened by a series of recent confrontations between Murray and senior leaders.

Yesterday, Murray told the associate deputy director of counterintelligence that if anything in the newly appointed executive director's personnel file made it into the media, the counterintelligence official "would be held responsible," according to one agency official and two former colleagues with knowledge of the conversation.

All three sources gave the following account:

The woman, a highly respected case officer whose name is being withheld because she is undercover, told Michael Sulick, the associate deputy director of operations, about the threat. Sulick told Kappes, and both sought a meeting with Goss to complain.

Goss, Murray, Kappes and Sulick met to discuss the matter. After Goss left, Sulick "got in Murray's space," according to one of his associates whose account was corroborated by another. Murray then demanded that Kappes fire Sulick. Kappes refused, and told Goss that he would resign. Goss and other White House officials appealed to Kappes to delay his decision until Monday.

Goss, a former CIA case officer and Republican legislator from Florida, promised during his confirmation hearing to set aside partisan politics and work to strengthen the CIA clandestine service. But current and former officials have said that his plans have been unclear to the senior clandestine service officials who would be responsible for carrying them out. In addition, they have been concerned by the backgrounds of the senior staff Goss has hired.

Michael V. Kostiw, who was Goss's first choice for executive director -- the agency's third-ranking official -- withdrew his name after The Washington Post reported that he had left the agency 20 years ago after having been arrested for stealing a package of bacon.

More generally, Goss's aides arrived at the CIA with harsh views of the clandestine service. Their views were laid out in a House intelligence committee report in June. "There is a dysfunctional denial of any need for corrective action," the report said. The clandestine service suffers from "misallocation and redirection of resources, poor prioritization of objectives, micromanagement of field operations and a continued political aversion to operational risk."

The report was drafted primarily by Jay Jakub, whom Goss appointed to the newly created position of special assistant for operations and analysis.

The House report's critique brought on a tough response from then-CIA Director George J. Tenet and led to a near-breakdown in relations between the agency and the panel staff. It was repeatedly noted by present and past clandestine officers that Jakub had a limited career at the agency, first as an analyst and later as a case officer.

"He never distinguished himself before he left," a former boss said.
Quote Reply
Re: CIA in Chaos [dhcrunner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If Goss is shaking things up, more power to him. This agency has been out of control the last few years. They are acting like a political, rather than intelligence agency. The Valerie Plume thing is the obvious example. She gets her husband appointed to some hack job for the express purpose of making the Republican handling of the war on terror look bad.

There has been leak after leak of classified data, all orchestrated to get Kerry elected. The CIA is opposed to the Iraq war, and they are acting politically to get their way. Their job is supposed to be providing information to elected decision makers. They aren't doing that job well either.

Some serious shake outs are needed at the CIA. Hopefully, the ones shaken out will be the ones causing the problems, not the ones doing the real work.

Since when are you CIA fan, dhcrunner?
Quote Reply
Re: CIA in Chaos [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'd hope McLaughlin wouldn't go, but the rest of them got caught playing the political game along with Valerie Plame and her husband, Joe Wilson.

The new guy can't keep the old guard on just for the sake of some sort of continuity (they were Tenet's people, through the Clinton administration) if all they're going to do is backstab and oppose their boss and Bush's directives in a passive manner.

Shit, those old fools didn't do such a hot job breaking up 9/11 (ass-covering leaking of memos to the contrary) anyway. Why should we think they'd be any better keeping up with current events?

We used to have CIA intel weenies with us out in the field when I was in special warfare. Some were very good and a few were horrible. Get rid of the horrible ones and cultivate the good ones.

Tony
Quote Reply
Re: CIA in Chaos [dhcrunner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
OP-ED COLUMNIST The C.I.A. Versus BushBy DAVID BROOKS

Published: November 13, 2004

[/url][/url] Columnist Page: David Brooks


E-mail: dabrooks@nytimes.com

ow that he's been returned to office, President Bush is going to have to differentiate between his opponents and his enemies. His opponents are found in the Democratic Party. His enemies are in certain offices of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Over the past several months, as much of official Washington looked on wide-eyed and agog, many in the C.I.A. bureaucracy have waged an unabashed effort to undermine the current administration.

At the height of the campaign, C.I.A. officials, who are supposed to serve the president and stay out of politics and policy, served up leak after leak to discredit the president's Iraq policy. There were leaks of prewar intelligence estimates, leaks of interagency memos. In mid-September, somebody leaked a C.I.A. report predicting a gloomy or apocalyptic future for the region. Later that month, a senior C.I.A. official, Paul Pillar, reportedly made comments saying he had long felt the decision to go to war would heighten anti-American animosity in the Arab world.

White House officials concluded that they could no longer share important arguments and information with intelligence officials. They had to parse every syllable in internal e-mail. One White House official says it felt as if the C.I.A. had turned over its internal wastebaskets and fed every shred of paper to the press.

The White House-C.I.A. relationship became dysfunctional, and while the blame was certainly not all on one side, Langley was engaged in slow-motion, brazen insubordination, which violated all standards of honorable public service. It was also incredibly stupid, since C.I.A. officials were betting their agency on a Kerry victory.

As the presidential race heated up, the C.I.A. permitted an analyst - who, we now know, is Michael Scheuer - to publish anonymously a book called "Imperial Hubris," which criticized the Iraq war. Here was an official on the president's payroll publicly campaigning against his boss. As Scheuer told The Washington Post this week, "As long as the book was being used to bash the president, they [the C.I.A. honchos] gave me carte blanche to talk to the media."

Nor is this feud over. C.I.A. officials are now busy undermining their new boss, Porter Goss. One senior official called one of Goss's deputies, who worked on Capitol Hill, a "Hill Puke," and said he didn't have to listen to anything the deputy said. Is this any way to run a superpower?

Meanwhile, members of Congress and people around the executive branch are wondering what President Bush is going to do to punish the mutineers. A president simply cannot allow a department or agency to go into campaign season opposition and then pay no price for it. If that happens, employees of every agency will feel free to go off and start their own little media campaigns whenever their hearts desire.

If we lived in a primitive age, the ground at Langley would be laid waste and salted, and there would be heads on spikes. As it is, the answer to the C.I.A. insubordination is not just to move a few boxes on the office flow chart.

The answer is to define carefully what the president expects from the intelligence community: information. Policy making is not the C.I.A.'s concern. It is time to reassert some harsh authority so C.I.A. employees know they must defer to the people who win elections, so they do not feel free at meetings to spout off about their contempt of the White House, so they do not go around to their counterparts from other nations and tell them to ignore American policy.

In short, people in the C.I.A. need to be reminded that the person the president sends to run their agency is going to run their agency, and that if they ever want their information to be trusted, they can't break the law with self-serving leaks of classified data.

This is about more than intelligence. It's about Bush's second term. Is the president going to be able to rely on the institutions of government to execute his policies, or, by his laxity, will he permit the bureaucracy to ignore, evade and subvert the decisions made at the top? If the C.I.A. pays no price for its behavior, no one will pay a price for anything, and everything is permitted. That, Mr. President, is a slam-dunk.
Last edited by: big kahuna: Nov 13, 04 13:21
Quote Reply
Re: CIA in Chaos [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't know - this makes me a little uneasy. The CIA's job is not to make the president look good. Bush may be able to get rid of political enemies, but at what cost? Now more than ever we need a strong clandestine service.

_______________________________________________
Quote Reply
Re: CIA in Chaos [dhcrunner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Looks like Goss is doing as supremely good a job of dividing the CIA as Bush is the country. "


Don't worry dhcrunner, in 4 years we will have Madame Hillary to bring this horrible country together ;-)
Last edited by: BigWaveDave: Nov 13, 04 17:36
Quote Reply
Re: CIA in Chaos [BigWaveDave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply


Exxx-selll-ent!!! (sarcasm on)
Quote Reply
Re: CIA in Chaos [BigWaveDave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I wouldn't worry about that. Hillary will be getting nowhere close to the dem nomination. I can't even believe that she's considering it. I'm a democrat, and I can't stand her. And many of my fellow dems feel the same way.
Quote Reply
Re: CIA in Chaos [dhcrunner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sunday, November 14, 2004
CIA plans to purge its agency
Sources say White House has ordered new chief to eliminate officers who were disloyal to Bush



Knut Royce WASHINGTON BUREAU

November 14, 2004

WASHINGTON -- The White House has ordered the new CIA director, Porter Goss, to purge the agency of officers believed to have been disloyal to President George W. Bush or of leaking damaging information to the media about the conduct of the Iraq war and the hunt for Osama bin Laden, according to knowledgeable sources.

"The agency is being purged on instructions from the White House," said a former senior CIA official who maintains close ties to both the agency and to the White House. "Goss was given instructions ... to get rid of those soft leakers and liberal Democrats. The CIA is looked on by the White House as a hotbed of liberals and people who have been obstructing the president's agenda."

One of the first casualties appears to be Stephen R. Kappes, deputy director of clandestine services, the CIA's most powerful division. The Washington Post reported yesterday that Kappes had tendered his resignation after a confrontation with Goss' chief of staff, Patrick Murray, but at the behest of the White House had agreed to delay his decision till tomorrow.

But the former senior CIA official said that the White House "doesn't want Steve Kappes to reconsider his resignation. That might be the spin they put on it, but they want him out." He said the job had already been offered to the former chief of the European Division who retired after a spat with then-CIA Director George Tenet.

Another recently retired top CIA official said he was unsure Kappes had "officially resigned, but I do know he was unhappy."

Without confirming or denying that the job offer had been made, a CIA spokesman asked Newsday to withhold naming the former officer because of his undercover role over the years. He said he had no comment about Goss' personnel plans, but he added that changes at the top are not unusual when new directors come in.

On Friday John E. McLaughlin, a 32-year veteran of the intelligence division who served as acting CIA director before Goss took over, announced that he was retiring. The spokesman said that the retirement had been planned and was unrelated to the Kappes resignation or to other morale problems inside the CIA.

It could not be learned yesterday if the White House had identified Kappes, a respected operations officer, as one of the officials "disloyal" to Bush.

"The president understands and appreciates the sacrifices made by the members of the intelligence community in the war against terrorism," said a White House official of the report that he was purging the CIA of "disloyal" officials. " . . . The suggestion [that he ordered a purge] is inaccurate."

But another former CIA official who retains good contacts within the agency said that Goss and his top aides, who served on his staff when Goss was chairman of the House intelligence committee, believe the agency had relied too much over the years on liaison work with foreign intelligence agencies and had not done enough to develop its own intelligence collection system.

"Goss is not a believer in liaison work," said this retired official. But, he said, the CIA's "best intelligence really comes from liaison work. The CIA is simply not going to develop the assets [agents and case officers] that would meet the intelligence requirements."

Tensions between the White House and the CIA have been the talk of the town for at least a year, especially as leaks about the mishandling of the Iraq war have dominated front pages.

Some of the most damaging leaks came from Michael Scheuer, former head of the CIA's Bin Laden unit, who wrote a book anonymously called "Imperial Hubris" that criticized what he said was the administration's lack of resolve in tracking down the al-Qaida chieftain and the reallocation of intelligence and military manpower from the war on terrorism to the war in Iraq. Scheuer announced Thursday that he was resigning from the agency.
Quote Reply
Re: CIA in Chaos [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gotta love a good purging. ;-)

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: CIA in Chaos [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kappes and Sulick both resigned today.

http://www.cnn.com/...ignations/index.html

_______________________________________________
Quote Reply
Re: CIA in Chaos [jhc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Cleaning House at the CIA 11/15/04 08:47 AM

The headline above the fold on the Saturday Washington Post announced the departure of the No.2 man at the CIA and discord within the ranks of America’s spies. Unnamed sources and anonymous former intelligence officials complained about the leadership of new CIA Director Porter Goss, tapped by the President to replace the embattled George Tenet. What’s it all mean? Probably good news. Goss is shaking up the agency.

Nobody expects America’s premier spy shop to be perfect or have all the answers. That’s not realistic. But they should do as good as Fox cable news and provide a “fair and balanced” view of the world. Intelligence before the battles in Iraq was just bad. In fact, reform is long overdue (see “The Case for Intelligence Reform: A Primer on Strategic Intelligence and Terrorism from the 1970s to Today” by James Jay Carafano,). America deserves better.

Critics of the Goss appointment said he would not take on the agency’s entrenched bureaucracy and fix the problem. We said they were wrong (see “A Good Choice” by James Jay Carafano). Looks like we’re right. The tenor of the Washington Post’s reporting, fueled in large part by disgruntled insiders, is wrong as well. Goss is doing the right thing and the front office managers and the back office complainers need to get on board or get out.
Quote Reply
Re: CIA in Chaos [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Alright, I wasn't going to wade into this one but am I the only one who doesn't think that the job of the CIA is to be loyal to the administration?

Here is my reasoning. The job of the CIA is to tell the truth (to the best of their knowledge) to people in power (no easy if it not what they want to hear). The job of the people in power is to use that truth to form policy. The white house doesn't want information they want analysis, I'm not sure of the amount of data that the CIA collects in a day but since they have an entire analysis division I'm guessing its a lot. The CIA is supposed to boil that down and give the administration the summary and most probably scenarios based on the data. In return the administration doesn't leak the name of undercover operatives (Hey Scooter I'm looking in your direction) and the CIA doesn't actively campaign against the administration. Get rid of the elements in the group that leaked information (am I the only one who thinks that CIA agents shouldn't be leaking information) and the press officers who OKed an active analyst publishing a book but just because you don't like the president doesn't mean you can't be a effective administrator/analyst/general spook.

If you think the CIA made some mistakes before get rid of all of the people who don't agree with the administration and then ask them to make a report for anything. These guys aren't stupid they will just parrot whatever the administration wants to hear. The CIA needs to be reformed into an effective intelligence agency, not into a rubber stamp factory.




Quote Reply