Hayden named as Bush CIA choice

[Sean]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4750357.stm

US President George W Bush has nominated Air Force General Michael Hayden as the new head of the CIA. Mr Bush described Gen Hayden, the former head of the National Security Agency (NSA), as "the right man to lead the CIA at a critical moment". Lawmakers have expressed concern at putting a military man in charge of a civilian agency, and civil rights groups are also raising objections. Porter Goss unexpectedly resigned as head of the CIA on Friday. His successor must face Senate confirmation hearings. The American Civil Liberties Union has urged the Senate to question Gen Hayden vigorously about the NSA's programme of domestic surveillance without warrants when he was in charge. "Hayden's approval of warrantless surveillance on Americans raises serious questions about whether the CIA would be further unleashed on the American public," ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero said in a statement.

[bishop]

the concerns about this guy are certainly legitimate... he was one of the people fervently behind the domestic spying program. now, using his connections with the defense and nsa departments (as well as with negroponte), he would be aptly capable of improving the government's ability to spy on its own people - one of the quintessential prerequisites of a police state.

to the best of my knowledge, there has not been any judicial review of bush's domestic spying program.. it would seem reasonable to me that that occur BEFORE approving hayden to head the cia - because if it was found to be illegal, then we certainly wouldn't want him to be in control of that department.

we've already seen what a guy like poindexter can do to erode our rights when given additional responsibilities/powers... do we want to do the same now with hayden?

[jose]

snip
WASHINGTON -- Following the announcement that President Bush will nominate General Michael V. Hayden to be the new Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, the American Civil Liberties Union urged the Senate to vigorously question the nominee on his involvement with the warrantless program to spy on Americans. Hayden was the director of the National Security Agency when this illegal program was launched in 2001 and has been one the chief defenders of these actions in violation of the Fourth Amendment and the Foriegn Intelligence Surveillance Act
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspyi...s20060508.html

[bishop]

so, my hunch seems to be correct - there hasn't been any judicial review of bush's domestic spying program...

in that case, hayden was the obvious and best choice according to bush's twisted twilight zone "logic".. (he always seems to make the worst decisions imaginable - regardless of the specifics.)

could it be that this choice has more to do with politics and window dressing than intelligence or national security?

ever since bush's blunder into iraq, disgruntled cia officers/analysts have been leaking out information to the public.. this information seems to have been motivated by true patriotism as far as i'm concerned - because it's showing the public how the administration ignored all intelligence/analysis that ran contrary to their war plans.. so, the cia is pissed that bush and his goons ran roughshot over them and are increasingly resistant to the president's requests. i can't presume to know about the internal bickering, but it's obvious that cia employees have been quitting their jobs and have been speaking publicly about the administration's antics.

i'm guessing that since hayden is so buddy-buddy with negroponte and rumsfeld (and by association, bush), that this choice is intended solely to save the administration from additional leaks - where disgruntled agents tell the public how badly the administration is abusing its power.

[Apeman81]

AAAAHHH! A man I've never heard of nor have ever met and before this moment did know existed!
Bush appointed and former military instantly raises red flags because Pelosi says so.
So let it be written, so let it be done.
AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!

One may wish examine the man without the autonomic, knee-jerk, everything Bush is bad taint.

[Scribbler1]

It is telling that both Democrats AND Republicans are having problems with this guy though. Why can't he just resign from the military?

[bishop]

the man headed bush's domestic spying program... now that may not be as bad as the people he uses to defend his torture policies, but it isn't THAT much better as far as i'm concerned.

[rmnunez]

From what I gather, Gen. Hayden gets along wonderfully within the intelligence community, has been dealing with institutions therein for decades and made his hallmark the integration of their input. His predecessor, Mr. Goss was not trusted and this is fatal in the intelligence business.

[Boetie]

First Bush Jr picks Supreme Court judges that aprove of making the Excutive Branch practically above the law. He picks Gonzales as Attorney General whom has the same mindset as Bush Jr's picked Supreme Court judges. Now he picks a general that is involved in illegal wiretapping.

This has nothing to do with the fight against terrorism. I think Bush Jr is doing this to make himself out as being in the same league as Hitler, Stalin, or any dictator.

Perhaps the whole thing about ousting Saddam was due to Bush Jr being jealous and couldn't stand the idea of Saddam getting all the reputation for being a bad ass.

[rmnunez]

Its hard to imagine any president selecting a Cabinet member that was pleasing to the opposition. These posts are supposed to be filled with people close to and who get along well with the president, but the opposition doesn't like the president and wouldn't approve of or understand people who were close and worked well with him.

[Osborn F Enready]

Hayden was selected because he backs the NSA wiretapping program, and helped defend it.

Yet another puppet, in a long line of puppets.

[rmnunez]

Wiretapping is a form of intelligence-gathering, anyone who works in the intelligence community would appreciate the benefits of easier procedures to tap phones. The NSA is the US intelligence entity responsible for communications intercepts, so it makes sense this entity would be most interested in wiretapping. It is unreasonable to expect someone directing the NSA in particular or any other intelligence agency more generally, to oppose easier means of intelligence gathering. Clearly the appointment of someone who sought greater restrictions, was more concerned and respectful of individual privacy or particularly mindful of potential transgressions when the intelligence was domestic or involved citizens, would be ideal from a political civil rights advocacy perspective -not from a national security perspective focused on a war against fundamentalist terrorism.

[bishop]

Quote by: rmnunez Its hard to imagine any president selecting a Cabinet member that was pleasing to the opposition. These posts are supposed to be filled with people close to and who get along well with the president, but the opposition doesn't like the president and wouldn't approve of or understand people who were close and worked well with him.

apparently you haven't understood the posts here in opposition.. we oppose hayden because he headed bush's domestic spying program! ¿comprende?

in fact, this is exactly the same reason why REPUBLICANS are also balking at his nomination..

[rmnunez]

bishop, what do you oppose "spying" or when its "domestic"? Do you realize spying has a lot to do with what the intelligence community does? Preclusions against a domestic focus by the CIA don't apply as well to the Defense Intelligence Agency, any of the individual armed forces intelligence entities, the Coast Guard intelligence branch, the National Security Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Drug Enforcement Agency, Department of State's Bureau of Intelligence Research and the National Geospatial Agency (formerly NIMA). Of the 16 different intelligence gathering entities within the US intelligence community, only one specifically cannot lawfully do domestic spying, for the rest this is completely legitimate -incluing the NSA.

[bishop]

there are parameters that each one of those other agencies has to follow in order to legally be able to spy on u.s. citizens. maybe mexican agencies can do whatever they want, but over here these agencies must first obtain a warrant to be able to conduct such operations. and with FISA, they have the questionable right of snooping first and getting a rubber stamped warrant second.

with bush's domestic spying program, which hayden was in charge of, the government never obtained (and even refused to obtain after the fact) warrants to legally snoop on u.s. citizens.

amendment IV of our constitution:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[Apeman81]

Quote by: bishop the man headed bush's domestic spying program... now that may not be as bad as the people he uses to defend his torture policies, but it isn't THAT much better as far as i'm concerned.

hahahahahahahaha
You are the classic "anything the DNC tells me to say must be true" loon.

Yessir, we just a'torture and a'spy on any anybody we wants to

[bishop]

yeah, too bad i'm not a democrat.. you must be part of the "you're either with us or against us" cult.

by law, torture is illegal (as well as immoral) - regardless of who it's inflicted upon. this is why the cia has typically outsourced torture activities to countries like egypt and saudi arabia..

but, i see that my mentioning of torture produced a knee-jerk bushbot reaction... i could give other examples if you like - there are plenty of examples where bush has overstepped normal due process under the law (such as indefinite detainment without ever charging the suspect with a crime)..

[Apeman81]

Quote by: bishop yeah, too bad i'm not a democrat.. you must be part of the "you're either with us or against us" cult. by law, torture is illegal (as well as immoral) - regardless of who it's inflicted upon. this is why the cia has typically outsourced torture activities to countries like egypt and saudi arabia.. but, i see that my mentioning of torture produced a knee-jerk bushbot reaction... i could give other examples if you like - there are plenty of examples where bush has overstepped normal due process under the law (such as indefinite detainment without ever charging the suspect with a crime)..

Define torture and then show me where the United States has engaged in it in relation to the topic.

Hint: Forcing men to huddle together and take naked photos is NOT torture. Try Beheading or hanging by the wrists and clubbing the knees and soles of the feet. Show me anything like that.

[bishop]

show me that the government has not engaged in torture.

[rmnunez]

Like asking Saddam to show Iraq had no WMDs?