New York Times Editorial - The senate and the general
New York Times Editorial - The senate and the general
Copyright by The New York Times
FRIDAY, MAY 19, 2006
Watching the confirmation hearing Thursday for General Michael Hayden as director of the CIA, it was hard to see past the sorry sight of a four-star general taking what should be a civilian job. But the hearing produced important - and disquieting - news about President George W. Bush's decision to spy on Americans without a warrant.
It seems certain that Hayden will be confirmed. Senator Pat Roberts, the Intelligence Committee chairman, made it clear that this would be yet another rubber-stamp session when he arranged to have the full committee briefed on domestic spying just one day earlier. If he had been genuinely concerned about checks and balances, rather than simply trying to smooth the way for the confirmation, he would have insisted on a full briefing four and a half years ago, when he learned of the surveillance program.
Hayden, who we still think should not be given this job, did say some reassuring things. He was, for instance, properly critical of the way Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld created his own intelligence agency before the war in Iraq. Hayden also said that intelligence analysis should acknowledge dissent and be candidly ambiguous when justified - and that politicians have to accept that ambiguity.
But the National Security Agency's domestic surveillance, which Hayden ran while he led the agency, loomed over the proceedings. Hayden could not explain coherently why he testified in 2002 that he had no authority to listen to Americans' phone calls without a warrant, when the president had already given him that authority.
Hayden's appearance also made it clear that the one warrantless spying operation Bush has acknowledged - listening to calls between the United States and other countries - is not the only one. And he testified that he did not, as Bush has said, design the NSA operation, which violates the 28-year-old legal requirement for a warrant for any domestic wiretapping.
The hearing drove home again that the spying is being conducted outside the constitutional system of checks and balances. Hayden said NSA lawyers decided whether individual surveillance jobs were justified, with periodic reviews by the Justice Department. That is no comfort. . The Justice Department recently quashed an investigation by its ethics office into the conduct of department officials who approved the spying program.
Roberts repeated Bush's claim that the issue here is whether the United States spies on Al Qaeda or not. It's hard to believe that even the senator doesn't know how absurd that is. No one objects to collecting intelligence on Al Qaeda. The issue is whether it will be done legally, and whether Congress will step up to this challenge of its duties and powers. Hayden's hearing did not provide much hope on either front.
Copyright by The New York Times
FRIDAY, MAY 19, 2006
Watching the confirmation hearing Thursday for General Michael Hayden as director of the CIA, it was hard to see past the sorry sight of a four-star general taking what should be a civilian job. But the hearing produced important - and disquieting - news about President George W. Bush's decision to spy on Americans without a warrant.
It seems certain that Hayden will be confirmed. Senator Pat Roberts, the Intelligence Committee chairman, made it clear that this would be yet another rubber-stamp session when he arranged to have the full committee briefed on domestic spying just one day earlier. If he had been genuinely concerned about checks and balances, rather than simply trying to smooth the way for the confirmation, he would have insisted on a full briefing four and a half years ago, when he learned of the surveillance program.
Hayden, who we still think should not be given this job, did say some reassuring things. He was, for instance, properly critical of the way Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld created his own intelligence agency before the war in Iraq. Hayden also said that intelligence analysis should acknowledge dissent and be candidly ambiguous when justified - and that politicians have to accept that ambiguity.
But the National Security Agency's domestic surveillance, which Hayden ran while he led the agency, loomed over the proceedings. Hayden could not explain coherently why he testified in 2002 that he had no authority to listen to Americans' phone calls without a warrant, when the president had already given him that authority.
Hayden's appearance also made it clear that the one warrantless spying operation Bush has acknowledged - listening to calls between the United States and other countries - is not the only one. And he testified that he did not, as Bush has said, design the NSA operation, which violates the 28-year-old legal requirement for a warrant for any domestic wiretapping.
The hearing drove home again that the spying is being conducted outside the constitutional system of checks and balances. Hayden said NSA lawyers decided whether individual surveillance jobs were justified, with periodic reviews by the Justice Department. That is no comfort. . The Justice Department recently quashed an investigation by its ethics office into the conduct of department officials who approved the spying program.
Roberts repeated Bush's claim that the issue here is whether the United States spies on Al Qaeda or not. It's hard to believe that even the senator doesn't know how absurd that is. No one objects to collecting intelligence on Al Qaeda. The issue is whether it will be done legally, and whether Congress will step up to this challenge of its duties and powers. Hayden's hearing did not provide much hope on either front.
posted by Carlos T Mock at 12:25 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home