Pendragon_6
05-06-2006, 09:59 AM
Another sign that Congress's intelligence reform is a mess.
Saturday, May 6, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT
Like most spy matters, Porter Goss's surprise resignation yesterday as CIA Director is hard to read. The White House insists he wasn't forced out, and at 67 years old the former head of the House Intelligence Committee has always said he didn't plan on a long tenure.
On the other hand, he was only in the job for 20 months, he leaves in the middle of a vast intelligence reorganization, and his successor may face a bloody election-year confirmation fight in the Senate. This isn't a great moment to leave.
The most distressing news would be if Mr. Goss is a victim of those parts of the permanent intelligence bureaucracy that resisted his tenure from the start. Nasty press leaks helped to knee-cap one of the aides Mr. Goss brought with him to Langley, and numerous career officials retired or were ushered out, including some from the clandestine service. With many in the agency clearly in revolt against the Bush Doctrine, Mr. Goss was sure to be a political lightning rod. It would be a bad sign if his abrupt departure means that the bureaucracy got its man.
In any case, Mr. Goss clearly lost out in the intelligence reorganization demanded by Congress and which has so far been a royal mess. This is not the fault of Mr. Goss, who took the CIA job before the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 became law. That brainstorm--promoted by the 9/11 Commission--created a Directorate of National Intelligence that was supposed to help us detect and repel any future surprise attacks.
In Full
Opinion Journal (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008344)
Saturday, May 6, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT
Like most spy matters, Porter Goss's surprise resignation yesterday as CIA Director is hard to read. The White House insists he wasn't forced out, and at 67 years old the former head of the House Intelligence Committee has always said he didn't plan on a long tenure.
On the other hand, he was only in the job for 20 months, he leaves in the middle of a vast intelligence reorganization, and his successor may face a bloody election-year confirmation fight in the Senate. This isn't a great moment to leave.
The most distressing news would be if Mr. Goss is a victim of those parts of the permanent intelligence bureaucracy that resisted his tenure from the start. Nasty press leaks helped to knee-cap one of the aides Mr. Goss brought with him to Langley, and numerous career officials retired or were ushered out, including some from the clandestine service. With many in the agency clearly in revolt against the Bush Doctrine, Mr. Goss was sure to be a political lightning rod. It would be a bad sign if his abrupt departure means that the bureaucracy got its man.
In any case, Mr. Goss clearly lost out in the intelligence reorganization demanded by Congress and which has so far been a royal mess. This is not the fault of Mr. Goss, who took the CIA job before the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 became law. That brainstorm--promoted by the 9/11 Commission--created a Directorate of National Intelligence that was supposed to help us detect and repel any future surprise attacks.
In Full
Opinion Journal (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008344)