- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
In a blunt statement to the press, Feinstein said that the CIA should be headed by a Intelligence professional at this time.
There is that school that believes that the CIA only gets stuff done (and morale is better) when the director is someone who comes up from the ranks and 'knows what needs to be done' (and presumably how to do it). I've read Weiner's "Legacy of Ashes" and Coll's "Ghost Wars", and that sentiment shows in the comments of many in or near the CIA.
Such as Stansfield Turner, James Woolsley and John Deutsch did prove to be unable to reform from outside ... but then, when they promote from inside, you get cowboys like Bill Colby that manage to do a lot ... and screw up a lot (see, e.g., the above books).
In light of the rather dismal results of the CIA over the years ("Legacy of Ashes" is quite clear on this; more dissenting voices come from such as Kinzer and Bamford), perhaps we don't need a more "effective" CIA.
Some have thought that the best thing that could be done to the CIA was to nuke it and start over.
In any case, Dianne Feinstein is the last person I'd be listening to for advice on this. She can go f*** herself.
Cheers,
