[Changleen]

Is there nothing this guy can't fvck up? Or is it that he doesn't want the intelligence community to be totally effective?

From: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/08/04/MNGUO82C7B1.DTL

I especially like:

"Our recommendations are not a Chinese menu," Lehman said. "They are a whole system. If all of the important elements are not adopted, it makes it very difficult for the others to succeed."

Maybe even Bush can understand that.

 

[golgiaparatus]

Sounds like Bush is being taken by one of the pitfalls of being a cocky man with too much power... micro-management (i.e. wanting to keep all the important decisions to himself).

 

[RhinofromWA]

But civil libertarians are expressing concern that putting one official in charge of domestic and foreign intelligence could lead to increased spying on American citizens. Lawmakers of both parties are also worried that a powerful intelligence czar in the White House could lead to abuses such as the Iran-Contra scandal or lead to faulty intelligence, such as the estimates of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction before the Iraq war.

"Placing the center and the directorate within the executive office of the president may shift the intelligent operations closer to the politics within the White House -- and may influence the intelligence gathering system," said Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa.

Bush and his aides cited this concern about politicizing intelligence as a primary reason for proposing that the new chief be housed outside the White House. The administration also views the new chief as an adviser rather than a Cabinet-level manager -- one of the reasons for failing to give the new director the authority to hire and fire others.

Under the current system, the CIA director serves as the president's intelligence director. The commission has argued that the CIA director has too many jobs -- running an agency, overseeing all intelligence gathering and serving as chief intelligence analyst to the president. Commissioners say the new intelligence director would not be tied to any of the agencies and could provide a more balanced reading of intelligence.

But some critics believe the new director could complicate decision- making by adding another layer of bureaucracy. In addition to the new intelligence director, the commission's report calls for three new deputy intelligence directors -- one for foreign intelligence, one for defense intelligence and one for domestic intelligence.

At a Senate Governmental Affairs Committee hearing Tuesday, several counterterrorism officials raised concerns about the organizational chart proposed by the commission, saying it could force the intelligence agencies to serve too many bosses.

"I do not believe that (the commission's) national intelligence director structure is workable," said Philip Mudd, deputy director of the CIA's counterterrorist center. "It's too diffuse an effort."

But Philip Zelikow, the executive director of the commission, testified the new structure would help break down the walls between agencies that have hampered intelligence sharing.

"We think right now that balance of power is heavily tilted toward departmental priorities, to the department that owns their budget," Zelikow told the Senate panel, "and we suggest that that balance needs to be altered so that national priorities are dominant."

Kerrey said lawmakers should prepare to be lobbied heavily against the panel's suggestions by top officials at the Pentagon, CIA and other agencies who will resist giving up any of their current authority.

"I know that Secretary (of Defense Donald) Rumsfeld is going to oppose this," Kerrey said. "And if they win one more time, if the (Department of Defense) wins one more time, then next time there's a dustup and there's a failure, don't call the director of Central Intelligence up here. Kick the crap out of (the defense department) because they're the one with the statutory authority over the budget."

All does not sound so well thought out......

So this commission is to direct the president on what to do? Or are they to find areas to change and offer them to the president?

Seems like enough hasn't been hashed out to impliment them all yet. Little to hasty to rush in and unravel the current system I beleive. Maybe once many of the concerns have been answered more can be implimented. Change for change sake is foolish. Knowing the system is not working 100% doesn't mean any change will be better.

I guess you guys would be happy if Bush rolled over on his back and let them pet his belly.... You must be thinking of Kerry. j/k

 

[RhinofromWA]

Actually I think NOT ADOPTING every last suggestion is wise even Presidential, IF there are real reasons and concerns behind the hesitation.

This is a magor change and is no garauntee to make it better...actaully gives this Magic person (with supreme powers to see and handle all the info) still unnamed a lot of power. Who is this magician again?

Rhino

 

[Slugman]

I thought there was already someone that was responsible for collecting and sorting all the intelligence... hmm what would that role be, commander and something.

I know the person has their own group of advisors that are suppose to help, or so their titles say. Hmmm, what do they call those people… some type of furniture if I remember correctly?

Just can't seem to figure out who it is that is already in a position to receive all the data from all the agencies and then make an informed decision...

Definitely need a new person in that role though...

 

[RhinofromWA]

I thought there was already someone that was responsible for collecting and sorting all the intelligence... hmm what would that role be, commander and something.

I know the person has their own group of advisors that are suppose to help, or so their titles say. Hmmm, what do they call those people… some type of furniture if I remember correctly?

Just can't seem to figure out who it is that is already in a position to receive all the data from all the agencies and then make an informed decision...

Definitely need a new person in that role though...

Realistically do you think that person can do that job and leave no stone unturned? It would seem to be quite the task....for anyone....whoever they might be.

I have difficulty imagining how much info is presented and how much must get filtered before making it to the top. That must be a sight to see. I know I wouldn't want to be respossible for missing any peice of info that later would stick out like a sore thumb.

Did the list give possible people to head this new position?

 

[Slugman]

Realistically do you think that person can do that job and leave no stone unturned? It would seem to be quite the task....for anyone....whoever they might be.

It's not like he's in the trenches working with the feild agents...