SPOOK DUMBFUCKERY: it's all about the chipping, mind control, directed energy weapon attacks on THOMAS S. BEAN: US DOJ OIG/FBI OPR COMPLAINT

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/05/hoekstra_its_wrong_to_call_cia_liars_--_except_whe.php#more



Hoekstra: It's Wrong To Call CIA Liars -- Except When I Do It

By Zachary Roth - May 19, 2009, 5:34PM



We told you earlier this afternoon about how Rep. Pete Hoekstra, who has called Nancy Pelosi's claim that the CIA lied to her "outrageous," has himself initiated a probe into whether the agency misled lawmakers about a 2001 shooting incident in Peru that caused the death of an American citizen.

And it looks like Hoekstra's hypocrisy goes even further. Think Progress points out that Hoekstra last night went on Fox News, where he explained to Greta Van Susteren that it's fine to criticize the CIA's performance, but not to accuse it of lying:




HOEKSTRA:


I think you do go back and you break it into two different issues.

One is the performance, how well, they're doing their job.

The second is whether they have misled or lied to Congress, two very, very different issues.




And yet, as Think Progress also notes, Hoekstra said last November in regard to the Peru incident, that the CIA "may have been lying or concealing part of the truth." And: "We cannot have an intelligence community that covers up what it does and then lies to Congress."

Although maybe there's an amendment to Hoekstra's rule that provides an exception if Peru is involved?

___________________________________


http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/05/cia_like_we_said_before_briefing_document_could_be.php


CIA: Like We Said Before, Briefing Document Could Be Wrong

By Zachary Roth - May 19, 2009, 3:23PM



The CIA has given another indication that the briefing document with which Republicans are trying to attack Nancy Pelosi is unreliable.

Yesterday, Rep. David Obey sent a letter to CIA director Leon Panetta pointing out yet another apparent error in the document. The Washington Independent's Spencer Ackerman asked CIA for a response to Obey's claim, and got the following statement:



While CIA's information has Mr. Juola attending briefings on September 19, 2006 and October 11, 2007, there are different recollections of these events, which Mr. Obey's letter describes. As the agency has pointed out more than once, its list -- compiled in response to congressional requests -- reflects the records it has. These are notes, memos, and recollections, not transcripts and recordings.
In other words, don't hold us to any of this.



And that comes on top of a cover letter that Panetta attached to the document when it was released, noting that it might not be accurate, as well as Panetta's later assertion that Congress would have to figure out the truth of the matter. Not to mention, the fact that, as we noted earlier today, four Democratic lawmakers are now on record disputing concrete facts in the document.

________________________________


http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/05/lawmaker_cia_already_being_probed_for_misleading_c.php


Lawmaker: CIA Already Being Probed For Misleading Congress

By Zachary Roth - May 19, 2009, 2:25PM


As they go after Nancy Pelosi over those CIA briefings, Republicans have been putting the burden of proof on the Speaker, suggesting that it's all but unheard of for the CIA to mislead others in government. But in fact, the agency is currently being probed for doing exactly that on a different issue -- and the effort was initiated by one of Pelosi's fiercest critics on the torture briefings kerfuffle.

Last night, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, who chairs the oversight subcommittee of the House intelligence committee, told MSNBC's Ed Schultz (h/t Democratic Underground):




On our subcommittee we are beginning an inquiry into a situation ... initiated by the ranking minority member to look at a situation where the CIA did mislead the Congress ... a documented issue of the CIA misleading the Congress.
A Schakowsky spokesman told TPMmuckraker that she was referring to the findings of a CIA inspector general report, portions of which were released last fall, which concluded that the agency had withheld crucial information from Congress and DOJ investigators who were probing whether CIA personnel committed crimes relating to the shooting of a missionary plane in Peru in 2001.




As the New York Times described it last November:



A C.I.A. surveillance aircraft mistakenly identified the plane as a drug-smuggling aircraft, and a Peruvian military jet shot it down, killing an American missionary and her 7-month-old daughter. The Justice Department closed its investigation into the matter in 2005, declining to prosecute agency officers for any actions related to the episode.



But [the inspector general's] report, parts of which were made public on Thursday, said that the Justice Department investigators and Congress were never allowed access to internal C.I.A. reviews that portrayed the downing as one mistake among many in the agency's counternarcotics program in Peru. The report said the agency routinely authorized interceptions of suspected drug planes "without adequate safeguards to protect against the loss of innocent life." (our itals)

____________________

TOMMY:







1) First of all, THE CIA DOES NOT ENGAGE IN COUNTER DRUG INTERDICTION. It engages in bogus PR scoops to "remove all competition in the lucrative drug trade".

THE CIA under PORTER GOSS, used airplanes painted to look like HOMELAND SECURITY planes, to move suitcases full of cocaine.


SEE, MADCOWMORNING NEWS archives.....click BLOGPOST TITLE ABOVE TO GET LINKED...see all the archives to understand.



WAYNEMADSENREPORT, long ago...2005-2006 posted the flight logs of CIA RENDITION AIRCRAFT delivering Heroin from Afghanistan to major american cities, and logs show the money went south to the CARRIBEAN BASIN BANKS like STANFORD, etc.

I MADE SURE THAT MUELLER'S FBI HQ, AND MINNEAPOLIS FBI had the flight logs on the milk runs into APPLE VALLEY, MN, airport where, the SECRET CIA--FBI--DEA facilitate RICO FELONY DRUG CRIMES under our nose. SAME SECRET TEAM demanded an interview with JESSE VENTURA shortly after he won the MINNESOTA GOVERNORSHIP?

SAME GUYS.

ALL TIED TO BUSH AND CLINTON CRIME FAMILIES.

ALL TIED TO RCMP WARRANT FOR MIAMI FBI AGENT TERRY NELSON'S MONTANA--RACICOT drug conspiracy WITH FBI HITMAN MIKE "chuckie" PETERS cleaning up the operation and witnesses using murder. PETERS was one STALKER THAT BOB MUELLER SENT AFTER ME ON 4-26-04 in Luverne, Mn, at a fast food restaurant. Hope, for Bob, that...uh...there ain't any photos of BOB'S HITMAN STALKING ME USING THE WARRANTLESS GPS TRACKING DEVICE THAT WAS IN MY OLD CAR, AND ALSO WAS PUT IN MY NEW TRUCK.







2) THE CIA IS KNOWn AS THE "COCAINE IMPORT AGENCY" by anybody who knows anything:



-- (MIKE LEVINE at EXPERT WITNESS RADIO SHOW, author of "The Big White Lie"...

--FORMER FBI AGENT RICHARD TAUS looking at CIA K TEAM moving coke into Long Island, New York (framed on pedophile charges, and the local prosecutor also got framed after he found out about The Brady Material--SUBORNING PERJURY...

--Former DEA agent CELE CASTILLLO ...recently framed by BUSH BUTT BUDDY AND MAFIA COCKSUCKER JOHNNY "house of Death" SUTTON (recently confronted by HOLDER and an offer to take a polygraph exam on the US ATTY AT WEST DIST OF TEXAS, JOHNNY SUTTON, JOINED A CONSPIRACY TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE IN THE SAVAGE "DICK CHENEY--NSA--NSA TSP--WHITTINGTON murder" of a pregnant christian housewife named CHRISTINA MOORE (murdered for giving info to HER HUSBAND ROBERT MOORE, who broke story on Cheney's secretive energy task force/ENRON PUMP AND DUMP USING FERC RULING GIVING ENRON sole right to "trade in energy futures" linked to the conspiracy to "take energy off the market" to create profits.
__________________________________




It continued:


The inspector general's report said that after the downing of the missionaries' plane, the C.I.A. had conducted internal reviews "that documented sustained and significant violations of required intercept procedures." But it said that the agency had denied Congress, the Department of Justice and the National Security Council access to these findings.
...

The report ... says that C.I.A. lawyers from the office of the general counsel "advised agency managers to avoid written products lest they be subject to legal scrutiny" in connection with the downing of the plane.


Who was it who released portions of the report last fall, and, according to Schakowsky, initiated the current inquiry?



That would be Rep. Pete Hoekstra, the ranking Republican on the intel committee.

At the same time that he released the report's excerpts, Hoekstra said he was asking DOJ to look into whether the CIA had obstructed justice, and called the incident "about as ugly as it gets." Schakowsky told Schultz last night that Hoekstra is "furious" about the incident.

That's the same Pete Hoekstra, of course, who's been front and center in portraying the agency as the embodiment of transparency and integrity in an effort to vilify Pelosi over the torture briefings. Appearing on CNN yesterday, Hoekstra called Pelosi's claims that the CIA had misled her "outrageous accusations."

But given that the agency is currently being probed on similar grounds -- in an inquiry initiated by Hoekstra himself -- perhaps Pelosi's claims aren't quite so outrageous after all.

Late Update: Thanks to reader XP, here's a bit more on Hoekstra's response to the IG report on the Peru shooting. Under the headline, "Republican Rep. Hoekstra Accuses CIA Of Coverup", CNN reported last November:


Rep. Pete Hoekstra on Thursday criticized "rogue" CIA employees involved in a joint CIA-Peruvian anti-narcotics program of withholding information after declassification of a CIA report identifying "routine disregard" of safety procedures that led to the plane being shot down.

...

"This issue goes to the heart of the American people's ability to trust the CIA," the Michigan lawmaker said Thursday. "Americans deserve to know that agencies given the power to operate on their behalf aren't abusing that power or their trust."

_________________________



TOMMY:



Let's make a distinction between CIA UNDER GOSS, and CIA after STEVE KAPPES AND HIS PALS GOT THEIR JOBS BACK.


THAT IS A BIG DISTINCTION.


GOSS-CHENEY replaced TENET, THEN KAPPES, AND HIS PALS KNOWN AS THE COVERT OP BULLS.


Cheney retaliated against CIA COVERT OPS thinking wrongly that "...I was tied to TENET--KAPPES--CIA COVERT OPS BULLS".


NOPE.


BAD MISTAKE.


BAD ASSUMPTION.


NO LINK TO ME AND KAPPES OR TENET.


NOPE.






RETALIATION CAME IN THE FORM OF:

--GOP PEDERAST scandal before 2006 election;

-- ABRAMOFF, DUKE, GUS BOULIS MURDER;

-- WATERGATE II;

-- DC MADAME PHONE RECORDS with Cheney's number...and....FBI HQ IGNORED THE CIA MURDER UNDER GOSS OF ASS. US ATTY DE LUNA, stabbed 33 times....DE LUNA thought to be leaker to WAYNE MADSEN REPORT? on "CHENEY'S NAME ON DC MADAME'S PHONE CALL RECORDS" which are...still available.


_______________________________


http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/05/in_savaging_pelosi_for_attacking_cia_gop_ignores_its_own_record_of_similar_attacks.php#more


In Savaging Pelosi For "Attacking" CIA, GOP Ignores Its Own Record Of Similar Attacks

By Zachary Roth - May 20, 2009, 1:08PM




We really shouldn't have to do this. As we've said before, the idea that it's some kind of outlandish and unconscionable slur to point out that the CIA -- the CIA, for chrissakes! -- can sometimes be economical with the truth is absurd on its face. But the Republican attacks on Nancy Pelosi for daring to make that claim just keep coming, so it looks like we're going to have to point this out:



Shocking as it sounds, the GOP hasn't always been so sensitive about harsh criticism of the CIA -- including leveling the charge that the CIA is being deliberately deceptive -- when it's served the party's political interest.

Before we delve into what Republicans have said about the spy agency in the past, let's refresh our memories on what they've been saying lately about Pelosi's charge that the CIA misled her, in a briefing on torture, about whether waterboarding had already been used.


Sen. Kit Bond, the vice chair of the Senate intel committee, today said Pelosi should apologize to CIA employees and called it "a tragedy that we are seeing this massive attack on our intelligence community."


Elsewhere, Bond said:


"It's outrageous that a member of Congress would call our terror-fighters liars."


Rep. Pete Hoekstra, the ranking GOP member of the House intel committee, called Pelosi's claim "outrageous."


Rep. John Boehner, he GOP House leader, said Pelosi "ought to either present the evidence or apologize."


Former speaker Newt Gingrich judged that Pelosi "disqualified herself to be the speaker." He said the allegation "smears everyone who's trying to defend her."


And former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson, in a column in today's Washington Post, called Pelosi's charge one of "a series of blows to the pride and morale of the Central Intelligence Agency" leveled lately by Democrats.


So that's the now. (And believe us, we could go on, but we know your time is limited.)

What about then then?

What have Republicans said about the CIA over the last few years?



As we reported yesterday, top Pelosi antagonist Hoekstra has gone so far as to initiate a congressional inquiry into whether the CIA misled Congress on a different matter -- the 2001 shooting of a plane carrying an American missionary in Peru.
Here's what Hoekstra said about the subject last fall:


"This issue goes to the heart of the American people's ability to trust the CIA," the Michigan lawmaker said Thursday. "Americans deserve to know that agencies given the power to operate on their behalf aren't abusing that power or their trust."
And here's another case of Hoekstra questioning the CIA's veracity -- on an issue remarkably similar to the Pelosi controversy -- dug up by commenter juccikucci. When CIA director Michael Hayden said that Congress had been briefed in advance on the agency's decision to destroy tapes that showed torture, a Hoekstra spokesman contradicted that claim, saying that Hoekstra was "never briefed or advised that these tapes existed, or that they were going to be destroyed."



And here's yet another, from Laura Rozen.


Last year, Hoekstra accused the CIA of withholding from Congress information about negotiations with North Korea. Hoekstra accused the administration of failing to treat Congress with "respect," adding: "We regret to say the administration has deliberately attempted to sideline Congress in the fear that providing us with information about the North Korean regime's continuing lies and reckless behavior would undermine the current diplomatic approach."



It's not just Hoekstra, of course, who's been smearing our terror-fighters.

When, in 2007, the CIA put out a National Intelligence Estimate on Iran that Republicans viewed as insufficiently alarmist, Boehner told CNN's Wolf Blitzer: "Either I don't have confidence in what they told me several months ago or I don't have confidence in what they're telling me today."


In 2006, Sen. Pat Roberts, who then chaired the Senate intel committee, accused the CIA of an "egregious intelligence failure" in declaring, under White House pressure, that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. Said Roberts: "This committee simply cannot accept intelligence assessments at face value," Roberts said. "Not having your actions second-guessed is something that is earned."


We could go on here, too.


We haven't even gotten into the 2001-2003 period, when it was fashionable in hawkish Republican circles to depict the CIA as a nest of liberal bureaucrats who, in order to undermine President Bush, were deliberately downplaying evidence that Saddam had WMD and was tied to al Qaeda, .

Needless to say, it doesn't look like any of the Republicans who are now going after Pelosi expressed similar outrage at their own party's CIA bashing. In fact, in several cases it's been the same people on both sides of the issue.


Not that there's anything wrong with criticizing the CIA when it's deserved. In fact, when the Church commission recommended giving Congress a role in overseeing the CIA, back in the 1970s, everyone probably understood that criticizing the agency might be part of the job. And even that that criticism might sometimes involve suggesting that the agency was being less than truthful. As harsh as those words might be for the tender ears of some of today's Republicans.