CIA Being Housecleaned for Good Reason

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

"Anonymous" Names Names
Former CIA counterterrorism expert Michael Scheuer reveals who it was at the agency who gave him "carte blanche" to criticize President Bush.
by Matthew Continetti
11/19/2004 2:20:00 PM


ON NOVEMBER 9, ex-CIA counterterrorism officer Michael Scheuer gave an interview to the Washington Post's Dana Priest. Scheuer, who ran the CIA's bin Laden unit from 1996-99, and whose latest book, Imperial Hubris (published under the pseudonym "Anonymous"), criticizes the Bush administration's counterterrorism policies in general and the Iraq war in particular, wanted to talk about his former employer. Scheuer told Priest that his bosses at the CIA (he gave the interview prior to leaving the agency) had "diluted the pool that supports our people overseas," which meant that "in the long term, we're less safe than we should be." What's more, Scheuer added, CIA management can't take criticism. Just look at what happened with his latest book. "As long as the book was being used to bash the president, they gave me carte blanche to talk to the media," Scheuer said. When Scheuer started attacking the CIA in interviews along with the president, agency brass forbade him from talking to the media.


Scheuer's stunning admission--that CIA officials actively promoted a book criticizing the administration they work for--has garnered some attention, mostly from conservative columnists like Robert Novak and David Brooks. But one question remained unanswered throughout the coverage--who, exactly, were "they"? Who gave Scheuer carte blanche to attack Bush? At a breakfast with reporters on Friday, Scheuer gave his answer: former CIA spokesman Bill Harlow.


Scheuer told reporters on Friday that, traditionally, he would have to arrange interviews through the CIA public affairs office. Each interview would have to be cleared before


Scheuer was allowed to talk. With Imperial Hubris, however, that wasn't the case. The book's advance publicity had hyped the fact that a CIA officer was anonymously breaking with the administration's anti-terror strategy. Interview requests flooded in. But Scheuer said that Harlow told him, "We're giving you carte blanche." Harlow's condition? Scheuer was supposed to let the public affairs office know who he talked to--after the interview(s) had taken place.


"The book was misunderstood," Scheuer said on Friday. "It's a book about the failure of senior intelligence officers," not an ad hominem attack on the president. During his first round of publicity interviews, he tried to set the record straight. "Once I turned it around," however, "and talked about leadership in the intelligence community," Scheuer said, "well, that was the end of the day." Since Bush was no longer his target, Scheuer had been gagged.


Of course, one reporter asked, Harlow couldn't have made the decision to promote Scheuer's book alone. Scheuer nodded. He said that Harlow would've needed authorization from his superiors for such a move. Harlow's superior at the time? Former CIA director George Tenet.




Matthew Continetti is a reporter at The Weekly Standard.

Tenet's an ass. BTW, just got done reading Hubris, and I thought it was more targetted at what was going on at the top of the CIA - too much emphasis on technology, not enough on real-time/human asset development.

But also details what Osama's problems with us are.

[exstatic]

The CIA hating this admin couldn't have anything to do with Plame being outed now, could it? I'd be pissed if I were CIA and some assclown was outing active operatives...

[Nbadan]

Common Ex, your not being sinnister enough. Once they've discredited the CIA, that pretty much gives the administration free reign to do whatever they please based on their own assessments or intelligence from opposition leaders like Ahmed Chalabi in Iraq. In fact, this smacks of what got us in trouble in Iraq in the first place.

Since when is whistle-blowing a reason to purge the most important agency in the war on terrorism? I wonder if Bush41 would approve since most of his buddies, hold-overs through the Clinton administration, are the ones getting the axe?

Once the CIA is gone, the only people the NeoCons will have to contend with are the Euros and Euro Press, but who listens to the Euros right?

[Hook Dem]

Uh, you do Dan, and that is all that matters.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Neither one of you get it.

Since peristroyka the CIA has favored technology over human intel, and it has bitten us in the ass repeatedly, culminating in 9/11.

The Bush WH gave a mandate to the CIA to develop more real world real time on the ground sources, and the clandestine ops folks weren't doing their damn jobs.

Since when is whistle-blowing a reason to purge the most important agency in the war on terrorism? I wonder if Bush41 would approve since most of his buddies, hold-overs through the Clinton administration, are the ones getting the axe?

Once the CIA is gone, the only people the NeoCons will have to contend with are the Euros and Euro Press, but who listens to the Euros right?

Holy man, don't forget to take off the tin foil hat long enough to wave at the black helicopters overhead.



They aren't doing away with the CIA, just trimming some fat. You said it yourself earlier this year, the CIA ed up on Iraq. Now they're being held accountable, and it's another part of some Bush Utopian Grand World Scheme.