Porter Goss Cia Director

[PatrickHenry]

So, our current Administration has found Representative Goss worthy to direct the CIA.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/10/...goss/index.html

President Bush on Tuesday nominated U.S. Rep. Porter Goss to lead the CIA, an intelligence agency that has been under fire and under the microscope since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. "He knows the CIA inside and out," Bush said of Goss, an eight-term Republican congressman from Florida, a former CIA officer, and until Tuesday, the House intelligence chief . "He is the right man to lead this important agency at this critical moment in our nation's history." Goss's nomination was praised by Republicans, but key Democrats objected to Bush's choice, questioning whether any lawmaker could bring non-partisan objectivity to the post.

My opinion of Goss? He's a Bush operative, a cover-up man from day one.

He was having a breakfast meeting in DC with Gen. Mahmoud Ahmad who funded Mohamed Atta, the lead hijacker on September 11th, 2001. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FD08Aa01.html

In early October 2001, Indian intelligence learned that Mahmoud had ordered flamboyant Saeed Sheikh - the convicted mastermind of the kidnapping and killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl - to wire US$100,000 from Dubai to one of hijacker Mohamed Atta's two bank accounts in Florida. A juicy direct connection was also established between Mahmoud and Republican Congressman Porter Gross and Democratic Senator Bob Graham. They were all in Washington together discussing Osama bin Laden over breakfast when the attacks of September 11, 2001, happened. Mahmoud's involvement in September 11 might be dismissed as only Indian propaganda. But Indian intelligence swears by it, and the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has confirmed the whole story: Indian intelligence even supplied Saeed's cellular-phone numbers. Nobody has bothered to check what really happened.

Then he is involved in the joint House-Senate investigation(coverup)

On the morning of September 11, Mahmoud was having a breakfast meeting at the Capitol with Graham and Goss. Goss spent as many as 10 years working on numerous CIA clandestine operations. He is very close to Vice President Dick Cheney. It's interesting to note that two weeks ago Goss suggested to the Justice Department to bring perjury charges against the new Cheney nemesis, Clarke. As it is widely known, Graham and Goss were co-heads of the joint House-Senate investigation that proclaimed there was "no smoking gun" as far as President George W Bush having any advance knowledge of September 11.

Porter Goss performed that task brilliantly, giving clear priority to providing political protection for the president. Goss acquiesced when the White House and CIA refused to allow the joint committee to report out any information on what President Bush had been told before 9/11 - ostensibly because it was "classified." This gave rise to thinly disguised, but eloquently expressed, chagrin on the part of the committee staff director, who clearly had expected stronger backing in her negotiations with White House officials. As a result, completely absent from the committee's report was any mention of the President's Daily Brief of Aug. 6, 2001, which bore the title "Bin Laden determined to strike in US," even though the press had already reported the title and the gist of that damning piece of evidence. Small wonder that the families of 9/11 victims were outraged and pressed even harder for an independent investigation.

So says Ray McGovern, a veteran CIA analyst. http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/081104Y.shtml He also says

There is, thankfully, a remnant of CIA professionals who still put objective analysis above political correctness and career advancement. Just when they thought there were no indignities left for them to suffer, they are shuddering again at press reports that Rep. Porter Goss (R-FL) may soon be their new boss.

So, Bushistas. Tell me how great Porter Goss is for the CIA. He was Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, asleep at the wheel while the terror rained down. More like driving the wrong direction down the freeway, heh.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Bush planted this guy, so he would have an informer after he gets kicked out of Washington. I believe Congress still needs to approve this. This is a horrible spineless batch of congressmen so they will probably OK it. If they parade Osama out this october (or whenever they decide to do it) and they give this Goss guy credit, he is in for life.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Originally posted by Patrick, He was having a breakfast meeting in DC with Gen. Mahmoud Ahmad who funded Mohamed Atta, the lead hijacker on September 11th, 2001.

Oh, to be a fly on the wall in that room.
Was that the same breakfast Bush 41 was at?

[bishop]

sadly, i don't know who they could've offered who would've done a better job. do any of you?

they need to keep on the path that tenet carved - one that increases human intelligence throughout the world. relying on satellite pictures and extremely limited human resources was part of the reason why the administration was able to spew all their pre-war allegations.

[Comrade]

Of course you think he's a Bush cover up guy. It doesn't matter who he nominated, you'd think he was a Bush cover up guy.

[gr8fuldaniel]

My main problem with it is that there is just something sleazy about Bush creating this new Dept. in his eleventh hour and putting a far right slimeball as head of that Dept., that is having breakfast with terrorists instead of arresting them on Sept 11. There was a lot of elbow rubbing going on while the Air Force was ordered to stand down while planes were allowed to crash into prime targets. He could have been in on it. Too many damned coincidences

[gr8fuldaniel]

Check out this video:Porter Goss from PBS

In a recent PBS piece, the new CIA director Porter Goss made it clear that he will have no problem with abolishing rights to fight the manufactured 'war on terror'.

You were expecting a non-slimeball from this administration?

[PatrickHenry]

Originally posted by Comrade, Of course you think he's a Bush cover up guy. It doesn't matter who he nominated, you'd think he was a Bush cover up guy.

Lame, Comrade. If you can't think of an argument, why post?

[gr8fuldaniel]

David Corn of The Nation has created a whole sh!tlist on Goss:

He blocked a House investigation into the embarrassing prisoner abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib. He also said no to an investigation of the dealings between the Bush administration and Iraqi exile Ahmad Chalabi, who has been accused of leaking US secrets to Iran and whose Iraqi National Congress provided false information about Iraq's WMDs

[PatrickHenry]

More importantly for CIA Director: from the David Corn article above concerning the Valerie Plame affair:

Goss rejected the call for an independent counsel. "I am not going to suggest there be any kind of independent counsel until it even rises to the level of coming to our committee's attention, which it hasn't risen to yet," he said. Yet the Justice Department, months later, did hand over the investigation to a quasi-independent prosecutor whom the department termed an independent counsel. And Goss told the paper that all his knowledge of the Wilson leak had come from the news media--meaning he had not bothered to make any inquiries of his own about the episode. How could he have not been curious about the leak and its consequences? He never asked anyone at the CIA whether the leak had caused damage? Or how it had affected the morale of CIA officers? ... But the CIA had considered this leak serious and had requested a criminal probe. Moreover, Goss acknowledged he had taken no steps to determine whether this leak was an important issue for the CIA. If Goss could not see the difference between the Wilson leak--which was possibly a felony violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act--and the usual leaks that appear in the media and if he was unconcerned about administration officials blowing the cover of a CIA officer engaged in some of the agency's most important work, then he does not deserve easy confirmation--or confirmation at all--as CIA director.

[bishop]

so now that you've sufficiently highlighted goss's faults, who do you feel would be a better alternative?

[gr8fuldaniel]

Originally posted by bishop, so now that you've sufficiently highlighted goss's faults, who do you feel would be a better alternative?

GW Bush has shown himself to be in arrogant abuse of his powers and should step down in shame from public office. He should never have so brazenly initiated a new branch of government with obviously corrupt intentions. Make an example of him for future upstarts.

[Technosoul]

No matter how much data and how hard you try to keep the Republicans informed with facts or a philosophy based in wisdom they just will not be able to listen to a word said, they hear only want they want to hear and reject everything else, no matter how logical or well researched, as falsehood.

Now I can see why Bush was not able to hear the truth about Iraq and only listened to what he wanted to hear and nothing more. It is just some attraction the right-wing has towards the arts of deception that they all seemed to be stereotyped with.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Looks like Goss doesnt think hes worthy of even working at CIA, let alone run the place.

Goss not Worthy from Times of India "I couldn't get a job with CIA today. I am not qualified," the Florida Republican told documentary-maker Michael Moore's production company during the filming of the anti-Bush movie Fahrenheit 9/11 . A day after Bush picked Goss for the top US spy job, Moore released an excerpt from a March 3 interview in which the 65-year-old former House of Representatives intelligence chief recounts his lack of qualifications for employment as a modern CIA staffer.

Bush is trying to get Michael Moore into a NASCAR race this weekend.

[Jeff]

Who made the following statement? “Whoever replaces CIA Director George Tenet "needs to be independent of political pressure" and Goss, having worked for the CIA before being elected to the House of Representatives, has shown that ability as chairman of the House Intelligence panel.” It was not George Bush. It is a quote from the Chattanooga Times Free Press from June 5th 2004. They were quoting Nancy Pelosi. I understand that she has changed her mind since, or could it be due, to his nomination.

[Melvyn]

The nomination of Porter Goss for CIA chief is a political ploy designed to deflect attention from the 9/11 commission recommendations and to make it look like the Presient is actually doing something. It may be that Goss is as qualified as anyone else. After all, we don't have an example of a really successful CIA chief do we so it is difficult to tell what qualities are really needed.

I noticed Goss gave up his Chaimanship of the House Intelligence committee, but he will retain his membership on the same committee. So ho is going to vote against him?


Mel - Blogging at http://radio.weblogs.com/0137954/

[Compugasm]

I guess I'll quote myself: "..People, such as yourself, distrust our government so much, or GWB specifically, they're willing to take the military from the President, and give it to an appointed official, or government agency? I'm sorry, I'm not giving GWB/JFK or anyone else the absolution of responsibility. Did't you point out to me that 'Transparentcy in government' was suspicious? The Patriot Act is better than a Czar. Would you want Senator Kerry as an Intelligence Czar?..." So, I'd like to go on record as not being a "Bushie". The key term is "absolution of responsibility".

[PatrickHenry]

Turn out Mr. Goss has some sneaky ideas about the CIA putting bugs in Americans BVDs: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5675992/site/newsweek/
or truthout: http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/081404Z.shtml

Rep. Porter Goss, President Bush’s nominee to head the CIA, recently introduced legislation that would give the president new authority to direct CIA agents to conduct law-enforcement operations inside the United States—including arresting American citizens. The legislation, introduced by Goss on June 16 and touted as an “intelligence reform” bill, would substantially restructure the U.S. intelligence community by giving the director of Central Intelligence (DCI) broad new powers to oversee its various components scattered throughout the government. But in language that until now has not gotten any public attention, the Goss bill would also redefine the authority of the DCI in such a way as to substantially alter—if not overturn—a 57-year-old ban on the CIA conducting operations inside the United States. The language contained in the Goss bill has alarmed civil-liberties advocates. It also today prompted one former top CIA official to describe it as a potentially “dramatic” change in the guidelines that have governed U.S. intelligence operations for more than a half century. “This language on its face would have allowed President Nixon to authorize the CIA to bug the Democratic National Committee headquarters,” Jeffrey H. Smith, who served as general counsel of the CIA between 1995 and 1996, told NEWSWEEK. “I can’t imagine what Porter had in mind.”

Sounds like the perfect CIA Director-nominee for the coming Police State America. What's not to love about Porter Goss??

[Rainbow]

Originally posted by PatrickHenry, He was having a breakfast meeting in DC with Gen. Mahmoud Ahmad who funded Mohamed Atta, the lead hijacker on September 11th, 2001. ... Tell me how great Porter Goss is for the CIA.

Do you have an info on a dinner ?
Post it. We all will be delighted :-)))

Is Goss great as CIA director ?
Call them. They will tell you the true info, for sure :-)))

None of us (probably) knows all the information in the matter you post. Assuming otherwise and following that path, even if a person has all the needed information in this issue, he/she is NOT going to publish it, especially on any web site.

"Who" meet "whom", does not provide the info to determine findings, yet.
These are speculations, only.

Example :
I met a person who later killed another person.
Am I going to be held co-responsible for that act ?

I sense that you desperately want to say something.
Being noticed ? Maybe.
That is not enough. Support your view by YOUR OWN determinations or findings.
You can not comply with it, in this particular subject (you raise), because you have NO info on that subject, except people from intelligence sources or so.

A separate issue (you raise) :
Republicans vs. Democrats or Democrats vs. Republicans (take your pick :-))) )

Neither Democrats nor Republicans (or, vice cersa) want political or structural changes within a state, so the system's core stays the same.
What is the difference ?
A membership fee ? :-)))
An emblem ? :-)))
Democrats have beeter "ladies", like Monica ? :-)))
Republicans are being supported by Arnold - The Terminator ? :-)))
Ect.

What are the core diferences ?
None :-)))
What to "argue" about, then ?

Those "who organize" all the campaignes are "the real winners". They make money on anything and everything :
- on those who are about to be elected
- on those who are about "suck other side out" and cast their votes, and prove their "righteouss and only choice"

I wish I have that money :-)))))
More voters, more money for me.
I wish elections are every month, week or so :-))))

Choose whoever you like, and enjoy your candidate
I prefer "One Dollar" , instead.

[PatrickHenry]

What are you talking about? Are you stoned or something?