Goss should not be associated with CIA, says Goss.

The daily 5 o'clock meeting at CIA headquarters that for the past three years has coordinated tactical counterterrorism operations involving senior CIA, FBI, Pentagon and Homeland Security Department officials has been cut back by new CIA Director Porter J. Goss to three a week, according to current and former administration and intelligence officials.

The sessions were initiated by former CIA director George J. Tenet because of the failures of coordination among intelligence agencies before Sept. 11, 2001. He used the sessions to push the agencies to carry out specific activities, whether at home or abroad. The meetings were continued by Tenet's former deputy, John E. McLaughlin, while he was acting director and initially by Goss.

Recently, however, Goss, a former House member and onetime CIA case officer, created "a different format," according to an administration official familiar with the program. Goss instead chairs a somewhat similar meeting with a smaller group of senior officials from the agencies, who brief him three mornings a week, the official said.

"They are still very much focused on terrorist issues," the official said. "If something exploded, [Goss] would get briefed right away."

And you conclude what from this statement?

He is not being recruited as an Agent and those skill he says he lacks are not necessary to lead the department.

woiyo wrote:

And you conclude what from this statement?

He is not being recruited as an Agent and those skill he says he lacks are not necessary to lead the department.

So would endores the hiring of low ranking navel officer to command a US naval submarine, an prima ballerina to coach the New England Patriots, or a lock-smith to come in and steamline your struggling business?

...it makes no sense...even from a "managerial" perspective.
Lacking relevant skills, abilities and aptitudes is lacking relevant skills, abilities and aptitudes.

The conclusion I draw from this is that you support Bushco and it's decisions no matter how asinine they appear to his least devout.

candidone1 wrote:

woiyo wrote:

And you conclude what from this statement?

He is not being recruited as an Agent and those skill he says he lacks are not necessary to lead the department.

So would endores the hiring of low ranking navel officer to command a US naval submarine, an prima ballerina to coach the New England Patriots, or a lock-smith to come in and steamline your struggling business?

...it makes no sense...even from a "managerial" perspective.
Lacking relevant skills, abilities and aptitudes is lacking relevant skills, abilities and aptitudes.

The conclusion I draw from this is that you support Bushco and it's decisions no matter how asinine they appear to his least devout.

Your whole statement here is ludicrous.

Would you hire a Master Locksmith to install a latch on a shed? Would you hire a Master Electrician to change a light-bulb?

Would you hire Bill Belichick to be a starting lineman for the New England Patriots? No? Could it be because he wouldn't pass the physical? He makes a great head coach, though, doesn't he?

The conclusion you should draw is that Goss recognizes his limitations and was not hired to be a field agent, but to be head of the organization.

Your pre-disposition of all things Bush clouds your judgement and your perceptions.

Your whole statement here is ludicrous.

Would you hire a Master Locksmith to install a latch on a shed? Would you hire a Master Electrician to change a light-bulb?

Would you hire Bill Belichick to be a starting lineman for the New England Patriots? No? Could it be because he wouldn't pass the physical? He makes a great head coach, though, doesn't he?

The conclusion you should draw is that Goss recognizes his limitations and was not hired to be a field agent, but to be head of the organization.

Your pre-disposition of all things Bush clouds your judgement and your perceptions.

Candidone... you are engaging in debate with those who value blind partisan loyalty far over and above job skills.
Some people can readily overlook mediocrity... as long as it comes with a goosestep and a "sieg heil".

McGentrix, JustWonders, lash, et al.:
having made yourselves into caricatures, you then resent people responding to your comic effect.
Perhaps you need a diversion... I suggest you all go salute something, or perhaps exchange "commendations" amongst yourselves.

I think I just stated why he's qualified.

The initial reason the Candidone felt that Goss was not qualified was from a statement he made as concerniong his lack of ability to speak Arabic and probable lack of technical skills in using a PC.

That seems to be enough for the Bushwackers to form an opinion championed by Michael Moore that Goss is not qualified for the job based upon the statement Goss made.

I disagree with that position that Goss is not qualified based upon those 2 items.

Maybe the Bushwackers can explain WHY the lack of those 2 skills disqualify him for the job as head of the CIA.

Please be specific as to relate them to your home improvement contractor is, well...just stupid.

Goss, himself, considers his own skill levels insufficient.
Goss should have a better idea of what skills are TRULY required of a worthwhile (or ideal) candidate...than yer average partisan hack messageBoard poster.
And Goss states in no uncertain terms that he finds his own skill levels inadequate to the task.