Congress is back in session...WHY are they going to confirm Goss?

[in_cog_ni_to]

WHY? Can someone give me a reason other than..."we need to choose our battles?" If the Goss confirmation isn't a "worthy" battle, then what is? :shrug: Please. Someone explain this to me. What's up? Why are our Democratic congress people not fighting it? I'm confused and I must have missed the reasoning behind it. Thanks! :hi:

[Frodo]

1. Election in a few weeks.

If a terrorist event were to happen (IF?), the Democrats would be blamed for why "we don't HAVE a CIA chief at this critical time".

[thebigidea]

50. as opposed to the Republicans being blamed for putting in a pol...

... at a critical moment when warnings of attacks are in the air and the Deputy can handle the job?

[Frodo]

57. That only works IF

1) There is no attack, and
2) Democrats oppose him.


But since opposing him IS the rish if we DO end up getting attacked #2 can't happen. So appointing a pol has little risk for Bush.

[thebigidea]

72. I'm talking about if there IS an attack.

Why replace an experienced guy with this blundering pol? At such a crucial moment, put in a new guy?

Will he get an 8 month free ride period as well?

[Mandate My Ass]

2. Because

the Ashcroft confirmation worked out so well they're sticking with a good thing.

The man himself said he wasn't qualified for the job but, hey, he's a warm body which is exactly what we need in the post 9/11 era. :eyes:

[Hawkeye-X]

3. Goss will be immediately fired for unqualified admission

by the Kerry administration and replaced with someone more responsible.

Hawkeye-X

[in_cog_ni_to]

5. Devil's Advocate here.

What if Kerry loses? THEN, we're in DEEP doodoo.

[wolfgirl]

7. If Kerry loses,

whether Porter Gosss is in charge of the CIA won't matter a hill of beans 'cause the situation will be worse than that. :cry: :scared:

[in_cog_ni_to]

13. I know it will be HORRID anyway if Kerry loses

but confirming Goss is really PILING it on. Man...enough is enough. Hitler incarnate will be the leader of the most powerful nation in the world and they want to add Goss to the mix?? GEEZ...enough already. :cry: :scared:

[BeHereNow]

4. Because we have LOST the country.

Period.
The congress critters are owned lock, stock and barrel
by the multinational corporate masters.
Goss is their man, and now ours, we have no say
because our representatives don't work for us.

Get ready folks- its gonna get ugly fast.
BHN
On edit, here is why:
http://www.theorator.com/bills108/hr2417.html

Prepare to meet the mercs, here, in Amerikkka.
Homeland security and the Patriot Acts were
never about protecting you- rather protecting "them"
from you.

[BeHereNow]

6. Goss and Pentagon goes global thread

I just pulled this up from my bookmarks:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2194784
Glimpse your future under Goss...and weep for the death
of our beloved country.
We have been the victims of a coup de tate,
YEARS in the planning and making.
If you think it is going to change anytime soon,
you are wrong, hopeful, but wrong.
They are just getting started.

BHN

[in_cog_ni_to]

14. Thanks for the links...

:scared: I think. :cry: It's so much worse than I ever imagined!

[BeHereNow]

16. Hard stuff, I know-

but we, as a people need to toughen up and
UNDERSTAND how serious the situation is.
Do I think we can actually change the course of events?
No, I do not. But those who fully comprehend what is
transpiring CAN survive. The people who continue to
base their political comprehension in personal ideology
will be washed away by the waves because they continue
to see the world as the wish it to be, rather than as it is.
Hang in there- start figuring out how to protect yourself-
the only way to do that is to know what's coming and
make your plans before it hits.
BHN

[G_j]

22. you got it

Goss is another piece of the coup.
Any Congress-person who votes for him has decided the American people are the real enemy.
This I can't forgive, any Dem who votes for him goes on my shit list (the pubs are there already). They should be apologizing to us for Ashcroft not putting a neocon fascist at the head of the CIA.
Not only that, but he may very well end up as Intelligence Czar.


NO NO NO NO !!!!
:argh::argh::argh::argh:

[BeHereNow]

23. You are a breath of fresh air...

I see you "get it."
A rare thing these days, even here at DU.
BHN

[G_j]

34. first flags went up when

I read his quotes about the Plame case and the "blue dress" here.
Further research just led downhill from there. :-(

[Killarney]

8. We need the news cycle

We don't want the news cycle on "Democrats whining about Goss" night after night. We need to get Kerry on the news. We need the news cycle to focus on Kerry's plan for our future and on Bush's daily gaffe's. Nothing else.

If Kerry gets in, Goss is gone.

If Bush wins, Goss or someone equal to him is in no matter what anyway. If we put up a fight, what's Bush going to do... nominate a Democrat next time? Of course not. He'll just keep nominating people just like Goss and meanwhile throw out the "Democrats are putting our country's safety at risk by playing politics with this nomination" talk point every day.

[BeHereNow]

10. Here's another possibility...

The dems are not contesting Goss because
it doesn't matter if Bush or Kerry wins?
The plan to further crush all dissent, with the help
of corporate mercs, if needed, is THE PLAN-
no matter who the president is?
BHN

[Killarney]

11. Ralph, is that you?

Sorry, but I don't buy the "Bush and Kerry are the same" meme. The last four years proved that a lie. The Tweedle-Dee & Tweedle-Dum lie drowned in the blood of our people over the past four years. People who would be alive today if that lie wasn't perpetrated and Gore had been elected president.

[BeHereNow]

12. They may not be the same

But clearly, their masters are one in the same.
Many roads can lead to the same mountain top.
The results are the same.
American empire and hegemonic domination
is not going to disappear because
John Kerry is president, nor are the vapid right wing
fundamentalists who are running the house and senate.
-Diebold machines are not going to disappear
-Our troops are not going to come home for at least four years
-Our deficit is not going to disappear
-The outsourced jobs will not be returning
Sorry, but the list goes on and on no matter who wins
the presidency.
I believe that if Kerry is elected president, it may look
look and feel different, but the fact is, we will all
still be heading towards the same mountain top.
The multinationals OWN this country and they can only
suceed in their plan if we are reduced to third world
status. so far, they are well on their way to achieving that goal.
Please, tell me how Kerry will turn this runaway train from hell
around...I would like some hope, but frankly I see NONE
in the BIG picture of where we are heading.

BHN

[sangh0]

26. That was the fastest backpedaling I ever saw

"Bush and Kerry are the same"

"No, they're not"

Both from the same poster. LOL!

[BeHereNow]

29. The results WILL be the same

the process may look different is what I said.
L.O.L. to you, cause you aint gonna know what hit ya.

BHN

[sangh0]

31. LOL!

"The process is the same"

"And the results will be the same"

"But there is a difference"

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[G_j]

46. mission acomplished

LOL

just like I said in my pm. :-)

[BeHereNow]

51. What's that old saying?

Give them enough rope and what?
:evilgrin:
Oh, so busted, that one.

[sangh0]

54. The old saying

"Don't believe everything you read"

[BeHereNow]

56. I don't.

Certainly more so in some cases than others....
care to guess which ones?
BHN

[sangh0]

62. I tend to believe

people who can explain themselves.

[G_j]

67. me too

I think you made your own point.

[ShaneGR]

15. LOL

When do the mandatory chip brain implants come into law?

[BeHereNow]

17. How do you get brain chips from the Goss bill?

Did you read it?
Do you comprehend what it says?
If so, tell me what it says in your understanding
and please explain where you get "brain chips" from.
BHN

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. News cycle? How about, "Kerry says Goss is unfit."

If Kerry wants to make news, he has to start saying something newsworthy instead of the "I'm not as bad as Bush" crappola he's been trying to sell..that isn't.

[BeHereNow]

21. Not just unfit- he is a fucking NAZI

Why isn't Kerry talking about the Goss proposals!
shit, that would make the blood run cold in
even the most ignorant bush-bot with even a SLIGHT
knowledge of history!
That is the REAL question- screw unfit, let's talk
about his intention to use corporate mercs and
foreign agents against the US civilian population!
BHN
(On edit: "foreign agents" put the Wolfowitz story
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=742167
and the recent Israeli spy story together with the Goss nomination
and his 2003 proposals...if that doesn't wake you up, then its too late for you dear reader.)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. The same reason he's not talking about Iraq.

He's playing it "safe", "smart", "realistic", "pragmatic", and all the other DLC "I'm not a liberal" crap that doesn't work.

"I'm going to have the troops home in my first term....maybe" is of the same ilk.

He's still chasing the "moderates" who aren't going to vote for him anyway under the delusion that the only way to win is to be not quite as republican as the republicans.

[G_j]

71. that is a highly disturbing article

does it ever end?

[BeHereNow]

73. Yes it is- highly disturbing

and precisely why we don't have time to
engage in "you know what" with "you know who."
These folks are playing for keeps.
AND, they have thought of everything.
Goss is part of the plan.
If so and so does not understand why his appointment
is an atrocity, then you know what?
He/she like the majority of "good" amurikkkans ('left' and 'right')
deserve what is coming.
And so it is.

BHN

[G_j]

75. part of the plan

that is what is crucial about this and I can't/don't believe many Dems don't know that. All you have to do is LOOK into Goss and read his many statements.I'd like to pour myself into a "stop Goss" initiative but I am also exhausted from trying put out all these damn fires! I thought we elected leaders to do this!

As for certain "good" amurikkkans, a few pieces of silver to betray the people.

[desi]

9. To prevent his nomination from becoming another obvious distraction

to the Kerry Campaign. It may be safe to assume that neither Kerry nor Edwards will vote in the affirmative so therefore it will be easy to fire his ass in Jan '05.

[sangh0]

18. Because no matter who gets the job

they still gotta report to Bush*

You're not hoping that if we defeat Goss, Bush* is going to nominate Kucinich for the job, are you?

If the Goss confirmation isn't a "worthy" battle, then what is?

Seeing as how Bush* isn't going to nominate anyone we like, and that defeating Goss gains us nothing, could you explain why this is a worthy battle?

If you think we should fight this, the burden is on YOU to show why anyone shoul fight this. We are not under the obligation to prove why we're not fighting this.

I'm confused and I must have missed the reasoning behind it.

See above. You're the one who has to explain the reasoning.

[G_j]

30. why?

(and there is a lot more info out there than I include here)

http://www.balkanalysis.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=397

US: If Goss is the Best We’ve Got, We’re All in Trouble

On Wednesday, a Bush administration spokesman declared Porter Goss, the president’s nominee for CIA chief, “…the most qualified man for the job.” This statement came in response to the shocking revelation, supplied by Goss himself, that he was in fact not qualified for the job.

<snip>
Even more troubling, while Goss has been a critic of the agency in the past he has also been more often than not a stalwart defender (not to mention a supporter of the infamous Patriot Act II). At a time when all American intelligence services are in dire need of a critical and public overhaul, the last thing the country needs is someone in charge who is both incompetent and prone to hushing up failures.

Despite demurring in March over the prospect of a CIA job, it seems that Goss changed his mind as the months wore on. That he did “not want” the CIA post, however, seems to have little to do with his own concerns over his qualifications; in actual fact, he seems to have his sights set on a much bigger goal – the proposed new office of “intelligence czar:”

“…In June, Goss proposed making the CIA director the intelligence czar, with control over the CIA, responsibility for advising the president and budget authority over all 15 U.S. intelligence agencies. Critics dubbed his legislation the ‘CIA takeover bill.’ The 9/11 Commission said the three jobs are too much for one official.

..more..
----------
Just a few Goss quotes:

October 9, 2002:

"Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden and their radical ilk are at the epicenter of terrorist activity in the Middle East. Nobody doubts that. It is not debatable. President Bush, Prime Minister Blair and others have made convincing cases about the threats the despotic Iraqi regime poses to world peace and stability today—today as well as tomorrow."
And he added:

"Iraq has expanded its weapons of mass destruction capabilities against its pledge not to. It still has deadly chemical weapons hidden throughout the country, and it has tried to develop nuclear devices as well. It is certain that Iraq has ties to many Islamic terror groups in the region, including Al Qaeda. Evidence supports Iraq's involvement in the first and probably the second World Trade Center bombing."

So, let's see: Goss, a former CIA agent, ignored studying something that did happen—his breakfast with the bagman of a 9-11 hijacker—while strongly pushing for a war based on a "threat" to our security that didn't exist.

Sure, let's make him CIA director. What the hell. He's been an effective stonewaller and excuse-maker ever since 9-11.

"No smoking gun," he said in 2002, when the Goss-Graham report was released.


-------------------------------------------------------

CIA NOMINEE IN PIC OF AGENCY'S 60'S ASSASSINATION SQUAD

at http://www.madcowprod.com

THE MAN PICKED by President George W Bush to head America's Central Intelligence Agency is even more of an intelligence insider than has so far been revealed...

The MadCow Morning News has learned that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Republican Porter J Goss of Sanibel Island Florida is a previously undisclosed member of the secret society "Book & Snake" at Yale.

President George W Bush's nominee to head the nation's flagship intelligence agency also appears to be visible in a photograph taken in 1963 in a Mexico City nightclub of members of the CIA's secret assassination squad known as "Operation Forty."

The twin discoveries come as news reports indicate that Democrats have decided not to make a serious issue of Goss's appointment. The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee went so far as to warn fellow Democrats Sunday against trying to block the nomination.

Could the skittishness about scrutinizing Goss be due to a secret past that would have difficulty passing closer scrutiny?

FULL STORY AT:

The MadCowMorningNews
www.madcowprod.com

------------------------------

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a5N3hLI098dQ&refer=us

Bush Expanding Power of CIA Director to Fight Terror (Update4)
Aug. 27 (Bloomberg) --

President George W. Bush signed orders giving more power to the head of the Central Intelligence Agency as an interim step until Congress can complete legislation creating a national intelligence director.

The increased authority will go initially to John McLaughlin, who is acting CIA director following the July 11 departure of George Tenet, White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters. Bush's nominee for the post, Representative Porter Goss, a Florida Republican, needs Senate confirmation.

The creation of a national intelligence director and a counterterrorism center were two of the key recommendations of the federal commission that investigated the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, which killed almost 3,000 people. The national intelligence director should serve in the White House and would need clear authority over budgets and personnel for the country's 15 spy agencies to be effective, the commission said.

Democratic leaders such as Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman said the position must control intelligence spending to be effective. ``If you're going to create a national intelligence director, it can't be phony,'' Lieberman said yesterday. ``The way to make it real in this town is with budget authority.''
==

[sangh0]

33. So what?

None of that addresses my point, which is if it's not Goss, it's gonna be some equally dreadful, and no matter who it is, they're going to report to Bush*.

Your post just says that Goss is a bad guy. I already knew that.

[G_j]

37. well I guess that just shows what a miserable state we are in

when there could be ANY reason to annoint a 'bad guy' to one of the most powerful positions on the planet. :shrug:

[sangh0]

40. Yes, we are in a miserable state. I agree

And we weren't asking why we SHOULD appoint a "bad guy"

I asked why we should fight it. There's a difference. :shrug:

Remember, I didn't nominate Goss, so I don't have to defend that nomination. But if you want me to fight with you, you'll have to explain WHY I would want to join you join this fight.

I repeat: You want me to join you in this fight, but you can't tell me WHY I should.

[BeHereNow]

38. Thanks for the links and a word of advice...

don't waste your time on people who don't/can't/wont read
and are only interested in disrupting adult exchanges.
It reminds me of talking on the phone while a five year old
tugs on your sleeve whining, "Why can't I stick lima beans
up my nose, mommy?" over and over and over.
As if such nonsense furthered anything other than personal ego.
This is a serious topic and posters who are only interested
in attacking other posters rather than contributing meaningful
dialogue CAN and SHOULD be discouraged, not engaged.
BHN

[G_j]

39. good advice

and you are right about the seriousness of this issue IMO.
I hope that others will read these posts and look into this matter further.

peace, G_j

[sangh0]

41. If it's such a SERIOUS issue

then why can't you tell me WHY I should join you in this fight?

[BeHereNow]

43. Not our job to educate you.

It is our right to ask you to know what you are
talking about if you want to join in the discussion.
Otherwise, you are wasting bandwidth.
BTW, plenty of information has been provided
on this thread, therefore:
a.You clearly have not taken the time to read it or...
b. You simply are not capable of comprehending or
discerning what it means.

In either case and in light of these observations,
please contemplate your motives before making
further contributions. Bandwidth is rather precious here at DU.

BHN

[sangh0]

44. I know about Goss

I asked why I should join you in your fight, and you can't answer *that*?

a) Read it
b) I understand it. It means Goss is a bad guy. So is anybody Bush* is going to nominate. Right?

[BeHereNow]

45. But Sangh0...

Nobody, least of all I, asked you to join anything.
Frankly, I don't care what you do.

BHN

[sangh0]

53. So now you don't want support

but you'll complain you don't get it.

It's always someone else's fault...usually a dem.

[BeHereNow]

58. When building a house

it most advantageous to build on rock.
As the architect of my future, I reserve the right to check
the quality of my foundation rock.
Next...
BHN

[sangh0]

60. Do you reserve the right to explain yourself?

Like why any Dem should fight Goss' nomination?

[BeHereNow]

63. Firstly, let me clarify this-

I do not believe the majority of Dems will fight
the nomination. "Why?" You will ask
My answer, the multinationals own both parties.
What does that mean to the rest of us?
Basically this: We are, in the long run, big picture,
on our own. The point is, to recognize where all of this
is leading- I know and I am ready, do you, and are you?
BHN

[sangh0]

64. You clarified nothing because you won't explain yourself

You just want complain. You claim that we are "on our own", but that doesn't stop you from blaming dems.

[G_j]

69. LOL

sssstretchhhhh...............

[BeHereNow]

70. Need a rubber band?

visit this thread...ROLF!
BHN

[G_j]

48. I don't think YOU should n/t

[BeHereNow]

52. Please , DON'T...

Please?
BHN

[sangh0]

55. But you think Dems should

but you won't say why or what's to be gained by opposing the Goss nomination. And now that I've shown you can't even explain WHY the dems should fight the Goss nomination, you've backtracked and claimed you didn't want any support.

[BeHereNow]

59. There is a marked difference

in the quality of wood when building a fire.
Next...
BHN

[sangh0]

61. And there's a marked difference

between the branch who is willing to explain themselves, and the kindling that is not.

[BeHereNow]

66. Ah, but the real issue is...

not whether it is a branch or kindling-
what is the its use in terms of survival.
I'll take oak tree kindling over pine branches any day.

BHN

[BeHereNow]

42. Check your PM

DU old timer consensus contained there.
BHN

[G_j]

47. gotcha

thanks :-)

[BeHereNow]

49. Yes, I knew you would...

Water seeks its own level and all....
:evilgrin:
BHN

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

19. The usual reason - The pablum Democrats won't fight.

Roll-over. Roll-over. Goooood boy.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

25. I heard the Dems were going to use the nomination to "beat up" on Bush

and how he is weak on homeland security by picking a "political hack."

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

27. Yeah, he's real bruised by those cotton balls.

They could have, at least, moved up to cream pies.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

28. Apparently BushCo is going to do a redux of the 2000 elections

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/aug2004/goss-a13.shtml

There were suggestions that Bush was seeking to instigate a conflict over the Goss nomination that would provide ammunition for the presidential election campaign, allowing the Republicans to claim that Democrats were undermining national security and leaving the country defenseless by blocking a vote on a new CIA director.

The Washington Post reported: “Senate Democrats said they would not fall into a trap like the one Bush set before the midterm elections of 2002, when he used his opponents’ objections to his version of a Department of Homeland Security to paint them as soft on defense.” The New York Times cited similar calculations in the Kerry campaign: “Democrats close to Mr. Kerry said in interviews that they were in something of a bind, because they did not want to appear to be blocking the nomination.”

Left unstated was a more chilling possibility: that the Bush administration would seek to blame its political opponents for any new terrorist attacks in the pre-election period.

-snip-

Kerry, Democratic Senate leader Tom Daschle, and the rest of the party leadership aim to reassure the ruling elite that the Democratic Party serves two indispensable functions: as a political safety valve, providing the illusion of an anti-Bush campaign to appease public opinion, and as a reliable alternative for the financial aristocracy, which can be trusted to take over and administer the affairs of state if the Bush administration appears exhausted.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

32. If the media doesn't question this and Americans don't start to question *

We're screwed. We cannot fight this if the media doesn't start acting like they are independent AND the American people don't start paying attention and stop acting so naive.

[KamaAina]

65. Because they're a bunch of mealy-mouthed wusses?

Can't think of any other reason offhand.

[Disturbed]

76. Neo Fascists are in control.

As long as Neo Fascists control Defense Dept., The FBI, The CIA, Congress, the Justice(?) Dept.,The Mainstream Media Representative ("Democracy') is nuetered.

Picking this fight will not further a thing because in the end a person will be chosen that will do the dirty work for the Neo Fascists. Some battles need to be avoided in order to fight the ones that bring about deep changes.

A change in Admins will not change much either. The Neo Fascists must be defeated to a point where they no longer control Amerika. Democracts in Congress will not bring about this change. Who can bring about real change?

[kentuck]

68. This means John Kerry will not be in charge of the intelligence....

Poppy Bush maintains control over CIA and will stab him in the back every chance he gets, providing he does not put someone into the position that is not a "yes" man for the Bushes....providing Kerry wins, of course.

[in_cog_ni_to]

74. Goss is one scary dude. Did you read this?

BHN posted a link to it.

And guess what, it is now LEGAL-
Our new CIA director suggested it in
his Bill, in 2003, and our representatives
said yes.
We are so screwed folks.

SEC. 503. AUTHORITY FOR INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY
ELEMENTS OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE TO AWARD
PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS.

(a) IN GENERAL- Subchapter I of chapter 21 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following
new section:

`Sec. 426. Personal services contracts: authority and limitations

`(a) PERSONAL SERVICES- (1) The Secretary of Defense may,
notwithstanding section 3109 of title 5, enter into personal
services contracts in the United States if the personal services
directly support the mission of a defense intelligence
component or counter-intelligence organization.

`(2) The contracting officer for a personal services contract
shall be responsible for ensuring that a personal services
contract is the appropriate vehicle for carrying out the
purpose of the contract.

`(b) DEFINITION- In this section, the term `defense intelligence
component' means a component of the Department of
Defense that is an element of the intelligence community, as
defined in section 3(4) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50
U.S.C. 401a(4)).'.

(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT- The table of sections at the
beginning of such subchapter is amended by adding at the
end the following new item:

`426. Personal services contracts: authority and limitations.'.

SEC. 504. PROTECTION OF CERTAIN NATIONAL SECURITY
AGENCY PERSONNEL FROM TORT LIABILITY.

Section 11 of the National Security Agency Act of 1959 (50
U.S.C. 402 note) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:

`(d)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, agency
personnel designated by the Director of the National Security
Agency under subsection (a) shall be considered for purposes
of chapter 171 of title 28, United States Code, or any other
provision of law relating to tort liability, to be acting within the
scope of their office or employment when such agency
personnel take reasonable action, which may include the use
of force, to--

`(A) protect an individual in the presence of such agency
personnel from a crime of violence;

`(B) provide immediate assistance to an individual who
has suffered or who is threatened with bodily harm; or

`(C) prevent the escape of any individual whom such
agency personnel reasonably believe to have committed
a crime of violence in the presence of such agency
personnel.

`(2) Paragraph (1) shall not affect the authorities of the
Attorney General under section 2679(d)(1) of title 28, United
States Code.

`(3) In this subsection, the term `crime of violence' has the
meaning given that term in section 16 of title 18, United States
Code.'.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x742167#742213