Posted on 11/17/2004 11:49:56 AM PST by demlosers
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- CIA officials angrily insisted Wednesday that a memo from intelligence chief Porter Goss did not order his staff to "back Bush," as a newspaper headline put it Wednesday.
According to an official in possession of the memo, Goss told his staff:
"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."
The New York Times reported on the memo Wednesday in a story with the headline, "Chief of CIA Tells His Staff To Back Bush."
"It is false," said one official, "quite baffling." The official called the New York Times headline "dopey."
A CIA spokesman said the memo was "a statement about the nonpartisan nature of what this agency does," rather than the opposite."
"What that means," said CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano, "is when we are asked to provide intelligence on a particular topic, we do so without shading or shaping the information in any way. It is not a question of partisan support."
The existence of the Goss memo was first reported Tuesday in The Washington Post, which did not interpret it as instructions to "back Bush."
In the memo, Goss also told CIA staff that he will soon announce changes in "procedures, organization, senior personnel and areas of focus for our organization," according to officials who have read it.
-snip-
"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...," Goss said.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
A New York Times journalist lifted a quote out of context to mislead its readers, just like it columnist Dowd has done to President Bush.
I'm shocked.
"CIA denies Goss ordered staff to 'back Bush'"
So...why is this a bad idea? I sorta thought that everyone in the intelligence service, and the military, should back the Commander in Chief. I think the liberals are, again, setting the agenda.
Not really, the point is that these folks are expected to support (as in, provide a service to) the Administration, but not necessarily to be involved politically.
anyone else see NYT as a stumbling drunk getting ready to fall face down into a gutter, mumbling, "I used to be the final word..."
Sounds like Goss nailed it - the CIA has a job to unearth and report on info without putting it into any political-agenda context. To color itwith any beilief system amounts to telling lies and sabotaging the policy-makers with false information.
Why is a confidential CIA memo being publicly discussed?
In addition to pink slips, some prison terms seem in order for those in the agency who have a problem keeping confidential information secure.
As a matter of policy, this administration may reduce the analytical standard for what constitutes actionable intelligence
As a matter of policy, this administration may determine the CIA will be allowed to deal with unsavory characters in the intelligence gathering process
As a matter of policy, this administration may reduce the dependence on stovepipe organizations and allow sharing of information among counterparts in other parts of the intelligence community.
You get the picture. I am sure that some of the whiners do not like the shifting dynamics for various reasons...
That's the problem with arguing with the left. They own almost every fact finding agency/research institute. When they need a fact or study that supports their socialism, all they have to do is manufacture one and voila! They've got a brand new statistic to bash conservatives with. It gets very tiresome.
Case in point: this "memo" which has streaks of the infamous TANG forgery.
Not quite. The loyalty of the agency first and foremost should be towards the US of A. Imagine the Queen B!tch from New Yawk as Pres. I would want the spooks to tell her "Buzz off!" and do what they need to to safeguard America.
In the current administration, because Pres. Bush's vision is right for America (more or less) we want the spooks to support him yet not be afraid to tell him that he is wrong if he is.
It's a shame that that rather obvious message has to be delivered via email memo. Anyone who didn't understand that, shouldn't have been working at CIA.
The problem is, and I will say it again, is that Bush did not rid the government of clintonistas when he first came into office. The clintonistas burrowed into the Senior Executive Service and did their damage. Now, anyone in the ranks who was promoted by them is suspect, some rightly so, others innocent of political shenanigans.
Sorry, but they have no more right to do that than they do to tell Bush to "buzz off!" The Agency is supposed to gather information to support the POLICIES of the USG, not the occupant of the White House. They support the policies, they do not make them, nor should they, no matter who is in office.
Now, when it comes to State, they are the policy-implementers but they should be taking their guidance from the SecState who supports the president's foreign policy goals. This State Dept. makes its own policies, no matter who is president, and that is wrong. It will be a LOT more difficult for Condi than it will be for Porter.
It's a shame that that rather obvious message has to be delivered via email memo. Anyone who didn't understand that, shouldn't have been working at CIA.
The problem is, and I will say it again, is that Bush did not rid the government of clintonistas when he first came into office. The clintonistas burrowed into the Senior Executive Service and did their damage. Now, anyone in the ranks who was promoted by them is suspect, some rightly so, others innocent of political shenanigans.
In CIA and State, it's not only Clintonistas but Carteristas. Some of those people have been moldering there for a long time.
Dang. Ideally I want the CIA to bypass partisan wrangling and lousy POTUSes and do what they need to.
But then again, this is a world far from ideal.
Thanks for the info.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.