House Intel Panel Chief Opposes Hayden

[cal04]

A leading Republican came out against the front-runner for CIA director, Gen. Michael Hayden, saying Sunday the spy agency should not have military leadership during a turbulent time among intelligence agencies. Members of the Senate committee that would consider President Bush's nominee also expressed reservations, saying the CIA is a civilian agency and putting Hayden atop it would concentrate too much power in the military for intelligence matters.

Bush was expected to nominate a new director as early as Monday to replace Porter Goss, who abruptly resigned on Friday. But opposition to Hayden because of his military background is mounting on Capitol Hill, where he would face tough hearings in the Senate Intelligence Committee. Despite a distinguished career at the Defense Department, Hayden would be "the wrong person, the wrong place at the wrong time," said the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Peter Hoekstra , R-Mich.

"There is ongoing tensions between this premier civilian intelligence agency and DOD as we speak," Hoekstra said. "And I think putting a general in charge — regardless of how good Mike is — ... is going to send the wrong signal through the agency here in Washington but also to our agents in the field around the world," he told "Fox News
Sunday." If Hayden were to get the nomination, military officers would run the major spy agencies in the United States, from the ultra-secret National Security Agency to the Defense Intelligence Agency. The Pentagon already controls more than 80 percent of the intelligence budget.

"You can't have the military control most of the major aspects of intelligence," said Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, who is on the Senate Intelligence Committee. The CIA "is a civilian agency and is meant to be a civilian agency," she said on ABC's "This Week." A second committee member, GOP Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, added, "I think the fact that he is a part of the military today would be the major problem." Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., mentioned fears the CIA would "just be gobbled up by the Defense Department" if Hayden were to take over.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060507/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cia_future

[ShortnFiery]

1. The Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee,

Rep. Peter Hoekstra , R-Mich.

That's good news. Perhaps some more members of the Republicans Party Leadership ... those who put the effective functioning of our Democratic Republic above partisan politics will step forward?

Let's all hope so ... and if they do, let's laud their courage. :applause:

Good new indeed! :-)

[Zorra]

5. Never trust a republican. They can talk all they want, but they

all supported Bu*h's policies and gave Bu*h every tool he needed to destroy democracy and everything good about our country.

When it comes to a vote - what will happen then?

[ShortnFiery]

10. I've had to deal with Republicans all my life ...

Believe it or not, there are "a few" Republicans, even those who say they're Conservative (not nut-case so) who have the hearts and souls of stellar Social Workers.

Nope, they are not many in numbers, but they're out there and IMO should not be turned away. ;)

[Jawja]

6. I was floored when I just saw the

cockroach Saxby Chambliss come out on CNN against him, too. :wow:

[Idioteque]

8. Bush won't nominate him I'm guessing...

...the Repubs are telling him that they won't vote for him. They are probably trying to stop the nomination from even coming up.

[ShortnFiery]

9. :shudder: Well, any port in a storm, aye? We can't get picky now. eom

[gratuitous]

2. Oh, is that a problem?

Well, don't worry; if it's a real problem and the Republicans actually stand up to Bush, he'll just appoint Hayden during one of Congress' interminable recesses, and voila! Bush gets his man, the country is harmed a little more, the Republicans can pretend they have some independence, and the talking chuckleheads can scold the Democrats for the sorrier state of American affairs. One of those win-lose-win-win situations the corrupt Bush administration and its sycophants love so well.

[Onlooker]

3. Preventing a military coup?

Wonder if there's any concern about that? Certainly, if one wanted to stage a military coup, a good place to start would be to put Generals and the like in charge of all the intelligence agencies.

[wakeme2008]

4. little problme here

It is the SENATE that approves of his selections not the House. So this is a lot of air about nothing.

When Repug SENATORS stand up that will mean something.

[ShockediSay]

7. Hayden put together the warrantless eavesdropping plan

when he headed up NSA. His reason for avoiding the judges warrants? Too much paperwork, too much time.

http://198.81.129.102/ABC_News_PDDNI.htm

When the CIA already has a tendency to avoid the law vis a vis renditions and torture, the last guy I'd want up top is a guy like Hayden. Unless, of course, we like a military fascist secret police state.

[IndianaGreen]

11. Looks like the Hayden trial balloon is about to get shot down

I can only characterize this as a trial balloon, how else can we explain the leaking of his name on a Friday right after Goss got the boot.

The problem with Hayden, from the Left's point of view, is that he is a Poindexter clone. Hayden is the mastermind of the NSA surveillance on all Americans, and as such he has been stonewalling Congressional efforts to get more information on NSA activities.

[DoYouEverWonder]

12. Bush's Potential CIA Pick Worries Some

May 7, 2006

WASHINGTON - Even before President Bush has named his choice to take over the CIA, the Air Force general who is the front-runner drew fire Sunday from lawmakers who say a military man should not lead the civilian spy agency.

The criticism of the expected choice of Gen. Michael Hayden to head the CIA is not just coming from Bush's political foes, but also from some influential members of his own party.

"I do believe he's the wrong person, the wrong place, at the wrong time," said House Intelligence Committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich. "We should not have a military person leading a civilian agency at this time."

Hoekstra said on "Fox News Sunday" that having a general in charge of the CIA could create the impression among agents around the world that the agency is under Pentagon control. If he were to get the nomination, military officers would run all the major spy agencies, from the ultra-secret National Security Agency to the Defense Intelligence Agency.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/cia_future;_ylt=A9FJqYsQcF5Egn4BMw6s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

Now these turkeys are starting to get worried? Where have they been the last 5 years, in a coma?

[CatholicEdHead]

13. Yep, conflict of intrest with the military vs a civilian orginzation

Do we know where his loyalities really lie?

[ixion]

14. given that * would like to eliminate Posse Comitatus

I think it's pretty clear. :scared:

[bluestateguy]

15. ANYBODY Bush picks is bad, and should be opposed

Having a general or admiral in the job should not be a disqualifier--Stansfield Turner was a fine CIA director. What's more of a concern is having a Bushbot in the job, which this guy is.

[Brothaman2k]

16. I nominate Bush for a Colbert "Brass Balls" award...

For having the f*cking cajones to nominate the same NSA jackass that gave him a rubber stamp to break the law by spying on Americans without a warrant. I mean not only are they brass plated, but they weight AT LEAST 10 pounds.:mad: