CIA vs. USA?
From the agency that brought you Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson. Powerline on Scarborough on the CIA’s campaign vs. the Bush administration:
Scarborough’s book explores the CIA’s efforts to undermine the Bush administration. It is a subject that we have written about here frequently over the past several years. John explored the subject in the Standard column “Leaking at all costs,” as I did in “Three years of the Condor.”
Scarborough states his thesis clearly in the introduction of the book, begining on page 1 with Scarborough’s discussion of a May 2006 letter by Rep. Pete Hoekstra to President Bush. In the letter Hoekstra states that “a strong and well-positioned group within the agency undermined the administration and its policies.” Scarborough illustrates his thesis with numerous episodes involing CIA officers. Many of these episodes have previously been reported, such as the disclosure of the Washington Post’s CIA secret prisons that John discusses in his Standard column. Scarborough notes that fired CIA employee Mary McCarthy was apparently a key source for that story.
Scarborough also discusses the opposition of former CIA Near East and South Asia national intelligence officer Paul Pillar to Bush administration foreign policy. Scarborough does not discuss the undisputed September 2004 incident reported by Robert Novak involving Pillar remarks at a private dinner in California. Steve Hayes summarized the incident for the Standard:
Pillar’s “management team” at the CIA, where he was employed as the national intelligence officer on the Near East/South Asia desk, approved [Pillar's] appearance. According to Novak, the ground rules for the speech were based on the “Lindley Rule,” which holds that the speaker, his audience and the event are not to be disclosed, “but the substance of what he said can be reported.” That substance, apparently, was a harsh assessment of the Bush administration’s handling of Iraq.
This kind of thing should drive lefties out of their trees. Powerful spy agency trying to undermine a duly elected government. * Lefties? Meanwhile, CIA denial with Powerline analysis:
The premise of Mr. Scarborough’s book — that CIA employees are working to undermine our government — is both ridiculous and offensive.
This statement is a class non-denial denial. Scarborough thesis is that the CIA has sought to undermine the Bush administration. Much of Scarborough’s evidence involves previously reported incidents and undisputed events. The CIA’s statement does not address any of the evidence adduced by Scarborough. Perhaps understandably, the CIA’s statement does not even directly address, dispute or deny the thesis of Scarborough’s book.
*My mistake. Of course. Through Demgoggles, this would be CIA just trying to ensure constitution-stomping Bush junta wasn’t elected again in 2004.
Topics: Iraq
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 8:47 am on Tuesday, July 24, 2007
3 Responses to “CIA vs. USA?”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
July 24th, 2007 at 9:41 am
Bush attempted to change the foreign policy status quo that eventually led to 9/11, with the people who formulated how the status quo in the first place. While it isn’t surprising that any individual might resist such a change, it is terribly disturbing that they would feel perfectly free to sabotage of an elected president. Perhaps they wanted to deny the knowledge of what the previous policy had led to, regardless of the evidence or the consequences of their denial.
Whatever the cause is with each individual, the institutional fifth column is this country has done great harm. They have given the enemy a gift they could never have attained without the political myopia of both government and private (media and academic) institutions.
Defeat is made of many things.
July 24th, 2007 at 11:17 am
Well put Saltydog.
I’d forgotten about the fired CIA officer, Mary McCarthy, who revealed the secret prisons. Information overload.
Of course some will say the ‘well-positioned management team’ in the CIA was just doing its patriotic duty by sabotaging the foreign policy of the Bush administration.
Pillar, Plame, WIlson, McCarthy et. al engaged in shades of treason that will come back to haunt future administrations.
The CIA must be purged of partisan teams or be disbanded.
July 25th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
The CIA like any other large institutional menagerie (”the Congress” “the FBI”) sooner or later (usually sooner) evolves to a position where cover your a$$ (CYA within the institutional structure, watch your back, deep-six your perceived opponent) becomes the order of the day.
The CIA’s actual “intelligence” gathering mission becomes secondary to the infighting and conflicting personal agendas.
While inter-institutional jealousy and turf protection meant the FBI and CIA didn’t communicate in a common sense manner relative to what they knew of perpetrators of 911 inside the country.
A strong group inside the CIA wanting to bring down a particular administration, while, of course, reprehensible, is only one aspect of what might be “wrong” with these kinds of sprawling bureaucracies.
Supposedly (don’t hold your breath) “things” are much better now and interagency communications vastly improved.