| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| The "cranks" at the CIA |
| 2004-12-06 |
| ON THE FRIDAY BEFORE THANKSGIVING, Michael Scheuer, the former head of the CIA's bin Laden unit, said CIA officials had given him "carte blanche" to attack President Bush anonymously last summer in publicity interviews for his book Imperial Hubris. Specifically, Scheuer said, former CIA spokesman Bill Harlow had told him "We're giving you carte blanche" to do whatever interviews he wanted, as long as the criticism in those interviews was directed toward Bush, not the CIA. Scheuer didn't follow the rules. He took on senior CIA officials in his publicity interviews. As a result, he said, he was "muzzled." Last week Harlow stepped forward to challenge Scheuer's claim. "His assertion that I gave him 'carte blanche' to attack the president is absurd," Harlow told me in an email. And he continued: Even [Scheuer] seems to have recognized that, since he was subsequently quoted in the Washington Post on November 2[5] as saying I told him in July to stop his incessant media commentary saying, "This is affecting the president, you're getting involved in the election. The agency is being interpreted as not being evenhanded" and also saying (quite accurately for once) that I told him some of his comments quoted in the media were "inappropriate for a currently serving intelligence officer." |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #12 Thus, Ivy Leaguers and West Pointers will ignore the Master Sergeant or the Tech Specialist because they didn't go to the right school. Can't speak for conditions in 1974, raptor. But today, while I don't doubt there are some West Point grads who may fit this description, I've got to say that the current crop (who came in just before or after 9/11) by and large don't -- at least so far as I can tell and so far as I can influence them. My own classes have heard me stress more than once that it is their NCOs that will make or break a young officer and that if they are lucky, they will get good NCOs who will teach them the ropes. I'm not above giving my students the real details of some of the WWII recruits and career NCOs in my own family, such as my uncle / godfather: one of the light infantry deployed in a pitifully thin line at Bastogne, without artillery, in below freezing weather just after XMAS. Absorbed the thrust of the elite German Nordwind attackers. Regiment had 40% casualties. Uncle ended up with a Silver Star, 2 Bronze Stars and 3 Purple Hearts in a few weeks of action. Took out 3 German pillboxes by himself when his squads were decimated by heavy fire. He was a very junior soldier at the time. Yes, a war hero. (a real one, ahem) My cadets know -- or ought to know -- that they will be lucky to have the privilege to lead soldiers like Uncle Tatch. (nickname) One thing West Pointers are taught is to push to accomplish what can be accomplished. Our cadets carry a very heavy academic, military and physical fitness load and there are no acceptable excuses for failing to accomplish any part of it. It may be that in peacetime, some of that attitude comes across as insensitive arrogance, especially in young officers who don't have enough real-world experience to know what is and what is not possible to achieve. I wasn't around in the 70s so can't begin to compare the Point then to what we teach and require now. The academic side has changed a lot, can't speak to the military side. But I'll point out my husband was an OCS grad rather than USAF academy grad, and he fits in well as a West Point faculty now that he's retired out of uniform. There are a number of active duty faculty in my department who aren't grads here, too, and they bring a different view point. So do the prior-enlisted among the cadets. |
| Posted by: rkb 2004-12-06 8:32:56 PM |
| #11 I think the distinction's between arrogance based on expertise, which is earned and is relevant to the tasks at hand, and arrogance based on social background, which many people still (falsely) correlate with Ivy League degrees. These days most Ivy Leaguers are not silver spoon types but rabid overachievers in certain areas favored by admissions directors: grade-grubbing and volunteerism mainly. The CIA needs more asian-americans who actually speak farsi, pashtun, arabic, mandarin etc and know those regions intimately from their upbringing and family ties. Where they went to school is secondary. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-12-06 6:42:09 PM |
| #10 Interesting hypothesis,TW.But the fine points are lost on me. |
| Posted by: raptor 2004-12-06 4:05:37 PM |
| #9 Big difference between snobs and elitists. Snobs will despise you, and ignore your opinions and experience as worthless/meaningless if you are not part of their "in group." Elitists, on the other hand, don't care where you come from or who you are, but have no patiences with those who have not achieved (made themselves part of the elite) in whatever field they value. Thus, Ivy Leaguers and West Pointers will ignore the Master Sergeant or the Tech Specialist because they didn't go to the right school. The Elitist will ignore the school boys, but pay strict attention to the Sergeant and the Specialist, because such people actually know what they are talking about. Elitists tend to be better bosses, but demanding taskmasters. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2004-12-06 12:27:07 PM |
| #8 RKB's students excepted, of course. ;-) |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2004-12-06 11:16:22 AM |
| #7 Most of my experience with Acad grads is not good,most had(like most Ivy Leaque grads)an elitiest(re:snobs)"You don't know shit" attitude.They had no concept of the value of"field experience.Case in point:While on Tac site duty(ROK,Hawk missle battery,1974)we were at state 3 readines,the fog was so thick you could not see 10 feet.Every thing was absolutly soaking,dripping wet.I was 52b30(generator mech),the newest generator we had was built in 1952,4 years before I was born.The main power circuit breakers kept kicking out,Buttur bar 2nd Luie was on my ass.After hours of listening to him,and trying to get him to understand there was nothing I could do about the weather.It finally took a WO4 to get him off my ass.I do not have much tolerance for University educated know nothings with little or no real world experience. |
| Posted by: raptor 2004-12-06 11:07:39 AM |
| #6 Much of the CIA's problem can be laid at the feet of allowing the agency to be dominated by graduates of Yale and Harvard. It is the same "schoolboy" attitude that destroyed British Intelligence during the Cold War. The great irony is that these Ivy League schools have long since surrendered their elite status to other institutions. Today, Yale and Harvard graduates in the CIA are much like West Point graduates are in the Army: looked at as untrustworthy, prone to poor management skills, disrespectful of their peers and subordinates, and less capable of performing their jobs than ROTC graduates from some state university. They are wrecklessly ambitious and superb at hosting cocktail parties and kissing up, and utterly devoid of loyalty. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2004-12-06 10:17:27 AM |
| #5 become the head of the CIA bin Laden unit, and then maintain that position from 1996 until 1999 I wouldn't doubt this guy failed us before 9/11. |
| Posted by: Cholurt Unomoger8553 2004-12-06 9:57:10 AM |
| #4 book roayalties not quite as lucrative as you thought Scheuer? |
| Posted by: 2b 2004-12-06 9:53:32 AM |
| #3 Weren't these guys the ones tasked with bin Laden? If so, it's becoming very clear where we can place much of the blame for the CIA failures in that regard. |
| Posted by: 2b 2004-12-06 9:30:15 AM |
| #2 Goss should prosecute him, or at least make his life a living hell, and make sure all the approvers are gone. This should not be tolerated and an example should be made for the encouragement of others. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-12-06 9:20:12 AM |
| #1 Some believed, naively, that the media would actually read some of Scheuer’s wacky rantings (e.g. "American soldiers are paid to die" or his laudatory comments about [Osama bin Laden]) and dismiss him as a crank. If CIA officials believed this, they should be fired for being completely ignorant fools. The US press loves anti-American cranks. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-12-06 9:11:39 AM |