Interview
with Mel Goodman re National Intelligence
Washinton Post, February 4, 2005
How
is new CIA director Porter Goss shaking up the intelligence agency?
Who
is on the White House short list to become the new director of
national
intelligence? What kind of Homeland Security secretary would Michael
Chertoff be if confirmed?
Former
CIA analyst Mel Goodman discussed intelligence reform as well
as the
current state of the agency.
The
transcript follows.
Editor's
Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over
Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions
for guests
and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
_____________
Mel
Goodman: Good morning. We are at an important juncture for the
CIA. Its
budget and personnel structure has never been higher, but its
integrity and
credibility have never been lower. As a result, other agencies,
such as the
FBI and the Pentagon, are setting up competitive missions with
the CIA, even
in the area of covert action. This is very dangerous!! Also, the
new
director, Porter Goss, was clearly sent to the agency with a mission:
get
the intelligence analysts into line. Also dangerous!! Look forward
to your
questions and comments.
_______________________
Washington,
D.C.: What is the morale of the CIA since Porter Goss has
stepped in? Thanks
Mel
Goodman: The morale at the agency is headed south....quickly.
Tenet was
very popular because of his strong personal skills. Goss has kept
to himself
and surrounded himself with a palace guard from the congress that
is hostile
to the agency in general and to many individuals specifically.
Too many
people have been driven out too quickly...and the agency will
suffer as a
result. There is need for reform, but Goss is tackling the wrong
issues.
_______________________
Chicago,
Ill.: Greetings,
I'm not sure if I can use the phrase "LA Times" in a
family-friendly
newspaper forum, but they had an interesting story last week Friday
"FBI in
Talks to Extend Reach."
The
article indicated that the FBI wanted to accelerate foreign intelligence
collecting.
Does
the phrase "probably cause" mean something other than
I thought? Would
adding more data to a really lousy computer system make Americans
safer?
washingtonpost.com:
FBI in Talks to Extend Reach (LA Times, Jan. 28)
Mel
Goodman: The FBI is extending its reach because it is exploiting
the
political weakness of the CIA. This feud goes back to 1947, when
J.E. Hoover
fought the creation of the CIA. The FBI needs serious monitoring;
its
computer capabilities are anachronistic (which contributed to
the 9/11
tragedy); and its analytical capabilities are mediocre at best.
Ironically,
retired CIA analysts are now teaching techniques to new FBI analysts
at
their Quantico facility in Virginia. More potential problems.
_______________________
Los
Angeles, Calif.: Mr. Goodman,
What
is your take on David Kay? The guy has the nerve to come back
and blame
the CIA for all the problems in Iraq? Is he for real? I guess
since he no
longer has to worry about his career at Langley it would make
sense to
please his political masters, but for pete's sake the CIA was
the only crew
that got it right. They had analysts very skeptical of Chalabi
and of Iraq's
weapons. They also provided the blueprints for President Bush
to act on
prior to 9/11. That is a lot better then anything I saw coming
out of the
Pentagon. What gives?
Mel
Goodman: You are wrong about Kay. Kay went out to Iraq, leading
a team
of more than 1,000, believing that there was WMD to be found.
He was
disgusted when he found NOTHING. Remember the CIA estimate of
October 2002
(the worst ever done) talked about large stocks of WMD and the
estimate
claimed "high confidence." Just a week or so ago, the
agency published a
classified memo, stating that all chem programs were stopped in
1991....and
made no mention of previous errors that led us to war. The CIA
is an
analytical nightmare.
_______________________
Washington,
D.C.: Isn't the fact that the new Intelligence Reform bill
passed by the House and Senate last year includes a special provision
that
the first DNI appointed can be the current DCI, without Senate
approval a
signal that Porter Goss will be the choice? Isn't his purging
of CIA
analysts who oppose official doctrine indicative? The 9/11 Commission
criticized the lack of Congressional "oversight" on
the CIA, but Goss was in
charge of that oversight prior to and following the attack, so
why was he
promoted to head the agency? Do you know anything about Goss's
earlier role
in the Bay of Pigs, Operation Mongoose teams, or other covert
operations?
Mel
Goodman: The Goss appointment was driven by cynical politics.
He was
never a reformer when he led the House intelligence committee.
In fact, he
called himself an advocate for the CIA. He ignored previous CIA
failures and
seemed to focus on Tenet for personal reasons. Tenet was a disaster
for the
CIA, but there are large systemic problems that need to be addressed....but
the 9/11 commission and the intelligence reform bill did not address
these
problems. Goss correctly fired the head of the directorate of
intelligence,
but he also told the troops to get behind White House policy.
Goss is
violating the basic principle of the CIA, which is to tell truth
to power.
_______________________
Fort
Mill, S.C.: Who and when do you expect to be selected for the
Director,
National Intelligence position?
Mel
Goodman: The job was offered to Bob Gates, who had to withdraw
his name
when he was nominated in 1987 (due to his lies on Iran-contra)
and who was
confirmed in 1991 (with over 30 votes against....more than all
CIA directors
combined in history). Gates was opposed to establishing an intell
director
but he was probably also fearful of another confirmation imbroglio.
Goss
would need to be confirmed, but has so blotted his copybook as
CIA director,
that he is no longer a strong candidate. There could be a retired
military
type, which would the wrong direction for this particular position.
_______________________
Annapolis,
Md.: Hi-
Victoria
Toensing, chief counsel to the Senate intelligence committee from
1981 to 1984, has recently argued that revealing the name of an
undercover
CIA agent (Valerie Plame) was not illegal.
Do
you agree with her assessment?
Do
you think the Plame case will impact covert operations in the
future?
And
should the United States reveal the names of CIA agents working
overseas? Perhaps post their names on a website?
Here's
the link to her op-ed piece in the Chicago Sun Times:
Mel
Goodman: Toensing is out-of-bounds here. Revealing the name of
anyone
under cover violates a 1983 law and calls for up to 12 years in
prison. And
for good reason....because such revelations put the lives of the
CIA agent
and, more importantly, all of his/her contacts. The revelation
ended the
professional career of Plame, but will not significantly have
an impact on
other clandestine collection. Finally, of course you cannot permit
posting
the true identies of overseas agents.
_______________________
Fairfax,
Va.: Seymour Hersh has reported that Goss has been forcing out
staff analysts who have needed expertise but who question the
administration's positions. Do you agree with Hersh on this and,
if so, how
much is Goss weakening America's intelligence capability by driving
out
competent staff?
Mel
Goodman: Goss has created a serious morale problem with his hostile
attitude toward CIA professionals and his palace guard from the
Hill. I
don't believe that he is targetting specific analysts. The process
is more
insidious in that Goss is sending the message that the CIA must
provide the
intelligence that the White House and that it would be foolhardy
to send
intelligence that appears hostile to policy.
_______________________
Washington,
D.C.: If the CIA is such a mess already, how can putting a
poltician in charge make things any worse? When Tenet
promised Bush that
the WMDs case was a "slam dunk" he politicized the agency.
Now they have a
congressman as director.
Mel Goodman: Totally agree that Tenet was a political director
who wanted to
please his political masters....not surprising for a lifetime
Hill
staffer....but the agency needs a reformer to correct the intelligence
analysis failures of the agency. The agency problem is not one
of collection
or coordination, but a failure of unimaginative analysis and lack
of
competitive analysis. Goss has no background for these problems
and
demonstrated no interest during his period as House intell chairman.
His
stewardship at the Hill (six years) coincided with Tenet's stewardship
at
the agency (again, six years), which was the period of incredible
analytical
failure. Tenet is accountable, but so are the House and Senate
intell
chairman who never called for post mortem studies or genuine accountability.
Even today, Goss is covering up the 9/11 accountability study
that was
completed last June and still has not been released to the House
and Senate.
_______________________
Toronto,
Canada: Hello.
Last
year there were various claims that the interrogation of those
detained
at Guantanamo Bay were producing "invaluable intelligence".
Since
then we have learned that the Guantanamo detainees were not "the
worst
of the worst", but were mainly illiterate tribesmen -- when
they weren't
completely innocent. We have also learned that the most senior
detainees
have been kept in other secret interrogation centers.
In
your opinion, does the claim that "torture-lite" is
producing "invaluable
intelligence" retain credibility?
Mel
Goodman: There has been virtually no important intelligence from
the
detainees at Guantanamo. These were, for the most, unlucky riff-raff
who got
caught up in random military actions. Torture won't produce intelligence
in
any event. And it is interesting that virtually all of the high-level
officials who wrote the memoranda that sanctioned torture have
been moved to
more important jobs or have had their hold on jobs strengthened:
e.g.,
Gonzales, Bybee, Cambone, etc. etc. etc.
_______________________
Mel
Goodman: One final thought before signing off....we need to pay
more
attention to the role of the Pentagon in taking on more assignments
that
include both clandestine collection and covert action, which dodges
the
oversight process of the congress and could lead to serious problems
for
American national security. Cheers.....Mel Goodman
