|
When Preznit Dubya chose his Poppy's Bay of Pigs confederate Porter Goss to replace George Tenet as head of the CIA, moderates in the Senate and intelligence community voiced concerns about the nomination of a former Congressman (not to mention a partisan crony/hack/co-conspirator) to a traditionally non-political post. Former CIA director Stansfield Turner even went so far as to declare it "the worst appointment that's ever been made."
At first glance, Turner's comment might seem like hyperbole. But considering Goss's opinion that the White House's revenge outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame was "no big deal", and considering his shady connections to Pakistan's ISI, and considering the fact that he is suspected of wiring $100,000 to Mohammed Atta prior to Atta's flying a jumbo jet into the WTC, and considering the fact that he has promoted intelligence reforms that "would have allowed President Nixon to authorize the CIA to bug the Democratic National Committee Headquarters"… maybe old Stansfield was trying to tell us something.
None of the above came up during Goss's nomination hearing. The prevalent attitude in DC at the time was that Dubya was a lame duck Preznit, headed for a crushing electoral defeat. What harm could Goss do in a few measly months? They decided to let the Bush baby have his bottle, and Goss coasted into position.
Now, two weeks after Dubya's re-election (sic), the long knives are out, and Goss and his crew are conducting a full-fledged, KGB-style purge of the CIA's senior ranks. Among the agency's high-profile losses are Stephen R. Kappes, the highly-regarded chief of clandestine services, and Deputy Director John McLaughlin. Scores more officials, representing decades of experience, are expected to leave in the coming months. Making matters worse, Goss has brushed aside efforts by long-time staffers to help smooth over the transition period at this particularly sensitive time.
They might as well have held their tongues. What's going on right now at the CIA isn't just a case of rushed transitions; it's an all-out ideological purge. One anonymous agent interviewed by Newsday painted the situation in the starkest possible terms: "The agency is being purged on instructions from 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."
Usually when the CIA undergoes this kind of top-to-bottom house-cleaning, it's because investigations have uncovered systematic abuses by the agency, such as was the case in the wake of Watergate, the Church Committee investigation, and Iran/Contra. Now, for the first time in its history, agents and analysts are being purged because they aren't crooked enough.
The prospect of a CIA staffed almost entirely by neoconservative True Believers and old-school clandestinas ought to fill every freedom loving citizen with dread, not only for the lawlessness that will surely flourish in such a hyper-ideological environment, but also for the incompetence that such fervor inevitably breeds. The global consequences will be far-ranging and long-lasting.
For the White House, this extreme action was not a matter of expediency; it was a matter of necessity. Too many people know where too many bodies are buried. The leaks were coming fast and furious, and whistles were beginning to blow. Total exposure of the Bush administration's vast criminal enterprise by disgusted insiders was starting to look like a very real possibility.
After a mass purge, the White House will be able to use their bought-and-paid-for media whores to portray any dissenting voices as mere disgruntled employees, profiteering hucksters out to make a buck by writing quickie exposés to sell on the talk-show circuit. If they were able to do it to the respected and widely-admired civil servant like Richard Clark, they sure as hell can do it to anybody else.
|