1
   

Sen. Rockefeller peeved with CIA's Hayden

 
 
Reply Tue 3 Jun, 2008 08:27 am
June 02, 2008
Sen. Rockefeller peeved with CIA's Hayden
Posted by Jonathan Landay
McClatchy Nukes and Spooks blog

CIA Director Michael Hayden says considerable progress has been made against al Qaida, which he portrays as still dangerous but on the defensive around the world.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-WV, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, begs to differ.

Though this tiff emerged late last week, it did not receive much attention. So Nukes and Spooks thought we'd give it some more.

Rockefeller wrote to Hayden to say he is "surprised and troubled" by a May 29 article in the Washington Post that quoted the nation's top spy as saying in an interview that "on balance, we are doing pretty well" against Osama bin Laden's terrorist network.

"The positions attributed to you are not consistent with assessments that have been provided to the Senate Intelligence Committee over the past year," Rockefeller told Hayden in the May 30 letter. "If the Intelligence Community's assessment of al Qaida has changed, I would expect the committee to be made aware of these changes immediately."

In the interview timed to coincide with the end of his second year at the CIA helm, Hayden asserted that al Qaida in Iraq has suffered a "near strategic defeat," the terrorist network has been dealt a similar drubbing in Saudi Arabia and has received "significant setbacks" around the globe because it is losing the battle for Muslim hearts and minds.

Moreover, Hayden said that the U.S. "ability to kill and capture members of al Qaida" has kept the organization "off balance" in its suspected chief safe haven in Pakistan's remote tribal region bordering Afghanistan.

Still, he said, bin Laden's followers continue to pose a dangerous threat and the CIA "remains worried" by what he contends is public complacency about the danger.

Rockefeller responded by listing a series of public reports and testimony by senior U.S. intelligence officials warning that al Qaida remains the most dangerous terrorist threat to the United States.

He also took aim at what appeared to be Hayden's implicit criticism of efforts in the Democrat-controlled Congress to pass a law prohibiting the CIA from using the controversial detainee interrogation technique known as water-boarding, deemed legal by the Bush administration but denounced by many experts as torture.

"If you view this effort as a focus on tactics, then you have failed to recognize that this program has done far more damage to our national security than any purported benefit it has provided," chided Rockefeller.

Finally, Rockefeller wondered whether Hayden is encouraging the very public complacency he worries about by giving upbeat assessments of al Qaida's threat, and questioned the timing of the CIA director's interview, an apparent reference to the possibility it could become a political football in the presidential campaign.

The committee, at least as of today, had not received a response from Hayden.

But the CIA appears to believe that the chairman went off somewhat half-cocked.

"Had the senator's office waited for a response from us before publicly releasing its letter, this could have been handled with ease," CIA spokesman George Little told Nukes and Spooks. "The director simply said in his interview that progress has been made against al Qaida, which remains a very dangerous foe."

No doubt the senator still wants to hear from Hayden himself.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 202 • Replies: 1
No top replies

 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jun, 2008 08:35 am
So Al Qaeda Is Defeated, Eh? Go Tell It to the Marines
So Al Qaeda Is Defeated, Eh? Go Tell It to the Marines
By Robert Fisk, Independent UK
Posted on June 2, 2008, Printed on June 3, 2008
http://www.alternet.org/story/86888/

So al-Qa'ida is "almost defeated", is it? Major gains against al-Qa'ida. Essentially defeated. "On balance, we are doing pretty well," the CIA's boss, Michael Hayden, tells The Washington Post. "Near strategic defeat of al-Qa'ida in Iraq. Near strategic defeat for al-Qa'ida in Saudi Arabia. Significant setbacks for al-Qa'ida globally -- and here I'm going to use the word 'ideologically' -- as a lot of the Islamic world pushes back on their form of Islam." Well, you could have fooled me.

Six thousand dead in Afghanistan, tens of thousands dead in Iraq, a suicide bombing a day in Mesopotamia, the highest level of suicides ever in the US military -- the Arab press wisely ran this story head to head with Hayden's boasts -- and permanent US bases in Iraq after 31 December. And we've won?

Less than two years ago, we had an equally insane assessment of the war when General Peter Pace, the weird (and now mercifully retired) chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, said of the American war in Iraq that "we are not winning but we are not losing". At which point, George Bush's Defence Secretary, Robert Gates, said he agreed with Pace that "we are not winning but we are not losing".

James Baker, who had just produced his own messy report on Iraq then said -- reader, please do not laugh or cry -- "I don't think you can say we're losing. By the same token, I'm not sure we're winning." Then Bush himself proclaimed, "We're not winning; we're not losing." Pity about the Iraqis. But anyway, now we really, really are winning. Or at least al-Qa'ida is "almost" -- note the "almost", folks -- defeated. So Mike Hayden tells us.

Am I alone in finding this stuff infantile to the point of madness? As long as there is injustice in the Middle East, al-Qa'ida will win. As long as we have 22 times as many Western forces in the Muslim world as we did at the time of the Crusades -- my calculations are pretty accurate -- we are going to be at war with Muslims. The hell-disaster of the Middle East is now spread across Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Gaza, even Lebanon. And we are winning?

Yes, we've bought ourselves some time in Iraq by paying half of the insurgents to fight for us and to murder their al-Qa'ida cousins. Yes, we are continuing to prop up Saudi Arabia's head-chopping and torture-practising regime -- no problem there, I suppose, after our enthusiasm for "water-boarding" -- but this does not mean that al-Qa'ida is defeated.

Because al-Qa'ida is a way of thinking, not an army. It feeds on pain and fear and cruelty -- our cruelty and oppression -- and as long as we continue to dominate the Muslim world with our Apache helicopters and our tanks and our Humvees and our artillery and bombs and our "friendly" dictators, so will al-Qa'ida continue.

Must we live this madness through to the very end of the Bush regime in Washington? Is there no one in that magnificent, imperial city who understands what "we" are doing out here in the Middle East? Why on earth does The Washington Post even give room to the fantasies of a functionary from the CIA, the very organisation that failed to prevent 9/11 because -- if we are to believe what we are told -- a phone call in Arabic about crashing planes into the twin towers hadn't been translated in time? Are we going to bomb Iran? Is this what we are waiting for now? Or is it to be another proxy Iranian-American war in Lebanon, fought out by Hizbollah and the Israelis? And does Mike believe al-Qa'ida is in Iran?

Israel continues to build settlements for Jews -- and Jews only -- on Arab land. And Washington does nothing. Illegal though these settlements are, George Bush goes along with it. They fuel anger and frustration and a righteous sense of grievance -- and Washington will not prevent this outrage from continuing. I open my Arab papers each morning to find new reasons why the Bin Ladens of this world will not go away.

Take the story that came out of Gaza this week. Eight Palestinian students won grants from the Fulbright scholarship programme to study in the United States. You'd think, wouldn't you, that it was in the interest of America to bring these young Muslim people to the land of the free. But no. Israel won't let them leave Gaza. It's all part of the "war on terror" which Israel claims it is fighting alongside America. So the US State Department has cancelled the scholarships. No, it's not worth turning yourself into an al-Qa'ida suicide bomber for such a nonsense. But it would be difficult to find anything meaner, pettier, more vicious than this in yesterday's papers.

Does Mike Hayden read this stuff? Or is he, like most of Washington, so frightened of Israel that he wouldn't say boo to a goose? Doesn't the CIA realise -- or imagine -- that as long as we allow the Middle East to fester under a cloak of injustice, al-Qa'ida will continue? Why are our forces -- and this is a question I was asked in Baghdad -- in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Jordan, Turkey, Egypt, Algeria (yes, US special forces have a base near Tamanraset), Bahrain, Kuwait, Yemen, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Tajikistan? (Yes again, French bomber pilots are based at Dushanbe to fly "close air support" for our lads in Afghanistan.)

And as long as we have stretched this iron curtain across the Middle East, we will be at war and al-Qa'ida will be at war with us. This new iron curtain, by the way, starts up in Greenland and stretches down through Britain and Germany, through Bosnia and Greece to Turkey. What is it for? What's on the other side? Russia. China. India.

These are questions we do not ask; certainly they're not the kind of questions that The Washington Post would dare to put to Mike and his chums at the CIA. Yes, we huff and we puff about democracy and freedom and human rights, though we give little enough of them to the Muslim world. For the kind of freedom they want -- the kind of freedom that allows outfits like al-Qa'ida to flourish -- is freedom from "us". And this, I fear, we do not intend to give them.

Mike Hayman may think the Muslim world is "pushing back" al-Qa'ida's "form of Islam", but I doubt it. Indeed, I rather suspect al-Qa'ida is growing stronger. Mike says they're defeated in Iraq and Saudi Arabia. But are they defeated in London? And Bali? And in New York and Washington?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Sen. Rockefeller peeved with CIA's Hayden
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 09/29/2024 at 02:25:11