Hayden Says He Informed Congress of Surveillance Program

apdst said:

It has nothing to do with training. Look at the members who are on the committee.

Click to expand...

That's my point, actually. If who gets on various congressional oversight committees comes down to seniority, political jockeying and whose party is in power at the time, and not so much about individual qualifications, then what does it matter whether nine people get to know what the CIA is doing versus all 535 members?

Cardinal said:

Well, that's not exactly how I feel, but that's clearly how you feel, which means that government, when it claims to do something for your security/well being, doesn't require oversight. This makes your label of Dear Leader for Obama rather inconsistent.

Click to expand...

Ok, so you need a refresher course in reading comprehension as well as civics.

I despise government secrecy. I do not want any government secrets at all.

That being said, I recognize the value of spies and espionage in maintaining the strength and security of the United States. One must know who the enemy is, and what his strategy is, if he is to defeat his enemy. I do not like spies, but I acknowledge the need for spies.

Thus the need to split the baby. Spies need secrecy, so give them their secrecy, but put it beyond the pale, outside the purview of Congress, outside the jurisdiction of US law, where secrecy may be maintained without corroding US law.

Dear Leader inverts that principle. His administration is less secretive about the spies and more secretive about his domestic activities. He publishes the doings of the CIA but not the details of meetings with big pharmaceutical firms. Those doings of US government which fall within the jurisdiction of US law he seeks to conceal, and those doings of US government which fall outside the jurisdiction of US law he seeks to publish. Not only is that morally bankrupt and criminally suspect, it is stupid and suicidal.

celticlord said:

Ok, so you need a refresher course in reading comprehension as

Click to expand...

Never mind.

Folks you all do understand that Speaker Pelosi has been part of the Gang of Eight for at least 4 Years and she claims that she was never brief is a crock of BS. Just because she didn't care to show up to any of the Briefings isn't the CIA fault.

If you all like I can list all who have been on the Gang of Eight since 1999.

Cardinal said:

I know, that's why I'm not actually interested in playing he said/she said. I'm more interested in the personal philosophy of how transparent, and in what manner, government and government agencies should be. Personally, I don't think it's realistic for we, the unwashed masses, to know certain things like ongoing cia operations. However, we do elect congress, whom we instill a certain amount of our trust, to oversee such things so they don't operate wholly contrary to our principles (and to our personal civil liberties). If our own representatives are not allowed in on the joke, as it were, then we have to stop so much as pretending that we live in a republic.

Click to expand...

Are you actually arguing that Congress is collectively good at keeping secrets? Seriously?

Do you have a particular reason for why all 535 members shouldn't?

Click to expand...

Because it's harder to keep a secret when it's known by 535 than it is when it's known by 8?

Or, perhaps a better questions might be, what qualifications does a congressman need in order to be on an oversight committees? Does it come to down to seniority, political jockeying, or legitimate training?

Click to expand...

There are no particular necessary qualifications. The goal is not to inform the best and the brightest among Congress, even if we could figure out who that is. The goal is to inform some, so that they know what is happening while simultaneously reducing the risk of the information getting released.

Hey folks may I suggest you all go and read US Code 50 this is the code that deals with the CIA and who and how they report to Congress and the President.

As a matter of fact I can think of a few folks in Congress that need a little refresher course on US Code 50 starting with Speaker Pelosi and Sen. Feinstein.