He told Michael Moore he wasn't qualified...

[freeflydrew 0]

From CNN

Quote

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- U.S. Congressman Porter Goss, President George W. Bush's nominee for CIA director, could be his own worst enemy when it comes to making the case that he deserves to lead the U.S. intelligence agency.

"I couldn't get a job with CIA today. I am not qualified," the Florida Republican told documentary-maker Michael Moore's production company during the filming of the anti-Bush movie "Fahrenheit 9/11."

A day after Bush picked Goss for the top U.S. spy job, Moore Wednesday released an excerpt from a March 3 interview in which the 65-year-old former House of Representatives intelligence chief recounts his lack of qualifications for employment as a modern CIA staffer.

"I don't have the language skills. I, you know, my language skills were romance languages and stuff. We're looking for Arabists today. I don't have the cultural background probably," Goss is quoted in an interview transcript.

"And I certainly don't have the technical skills, uh, as my children remind me every day: 'Dad you got to get better on your computer.' Uh, so, the things that you need to have, I don't have."

Goss, who served with the CIA clandestine services in Latin America and Europe in the 1960s, was not immediately available for comment.

The White House dismissed the Moore interview transcript as "ridiculous hearsay" and emphasized the depth of bipartisan respect for Goss on Capitol Hill.

"Porter Goss has very strong support from Republicans, and Democrats including Sen. Bob Graham of Florida," said White House spokesman Trent Duffy. Graham is the former head of Senate intelligence.

"No one's really questioning his qualifications. Even people who say he's too political for the job say he has qualifications for the job," Duffy added.

Goss appears in Moore's film, the most financially successful documentary in history, during a segment devoted to the USA Patriot Act, an anti-terrorism measure.

Moore told Reuters that Goss, who until Tuesday was chairman of the House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, granted an interview to two of his producers without first checking to see who they worked for.

"You'd think the person who was the head of the intelligence committee would ask a few more questions," said Moore.

"The reality is that Porter Goss was in charge of the oversight of the CIA during a time when the CIA didn't do its job, which in part resulted in the loss of lives of 3,000 people," he said via telephone from New York.

Goss is expected to appear at confirmation hearings before the Senate intelligence committee next month.

Hhhmmm...

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

"I couldn't get a job with CIA today. I am not qualified," the Florida Republican told documentary-maker Michael Moore's production company during the filming of the anti-Bush movie "Fahrenheit 9/11."

A day after Bush picked Goss for the top U.S. spy job, Moore Wednesday released an excerpt from a March 3 interview in which the 65-year-old former House of Representatives intelligence chief recounts his lack of qualifications for employment as a modern CIA staffer.

"I don't have the language skills. I, you know, my language skills were romance languages and stuff. We're looking for Arabists today. I don't have the cultural background probably," Goss is quoted in an interview transcript.

"And I certainly don't have the technical skills, uh, as my children remind me every day: 'Dad you got to get better on your computer.' Uh, so, the things that you need to have, I don't have."

He might not have the skills necessary to be an effective field operative, but does he need those skills to run the organization? The entire BOD at my employer doesn't know jack about Unix, but they do a pretty good job at keeping us afloat and more importantly, me employed.

Quote

Goss appears in Moore's film, the most financially successful documentary in history, during a segment devoted to the USA Patriot Act, an anti-terrorism measure.

Great - we're still calling it a documentary.

This article is about as insightful as the Republicans thread, the Kerry's Resume thread, or the Bush's resume thread. It's crap.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[Muenkel 0]

I'm with Jimbo. I wouldn't exactly consider Michael Moore a reliable source.

_________________________________________
Chris

[FallRate 0]

On the very bright side of things, Goss recognizes that the demands made upon today's intelligence community have changed. And as Jimbo has alluded: it is best to have someone in the position of evaluating intelligence who has had enough experience to acquire some of his own.

Edited to add....And as far as being a 65-year-old: As much as we love to discount the opinions of people in this age bracket, I love the idea of having someone who can say to the President: "Sir, if I were a younger man and had any concern about my political future, I might be willing to nod my head and blow smoke up your ass. But this, Sir, is the way I see it."

FallRate

[Ron 10]

Once again Moore speaks and the left listens....

Funny since everyone in the government seems to think he was a good choice.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[quade 4]

Quote

Funny since everyone in the government seems to think he was a good choice.

That's not true. Certainly not -everyone-.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/10/cia.goss/index.html

There has been some question, even beyond what Michale Moore says, about this post going to any politician.

I'm not really sure I agree or disagree with that, but to say that "everyone in the government seems to think he was a good choice" is simply not true.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Ron 10]

Quote

That's not true. Certainly not -everyone-.

http://www.cnn.com/.../cia.goss/index.html

There has been some question, even beyond what Michale Moore says, about this post going to any politician.

You somehow find it funny that Democrats didn't like a Republican getting the job?

Also from your own site...:

Quote

Goss's nomination was praised by Republicans, but key Democrats objected to Bush's choice, questioning whether any lawmaker could bring non-partisan objectivity to the post.

So Rep's liked it and a few Dem's didn't?

You think thats business as usual on the Hill?
If Skerry was in office and wanted to put a Dem in there...The roles would be reversed.

Quote

I'm not really sure I agree or disagree with that, but to say that "everyone in the government seems to think he was a good choice" is simply not true.

OK MOST think its a good choice INCLUDING Kerry and the Rep half of the 911 commission.

Do you really think that you can find a guy for such a post that has the experience but is neither a Rep, or Dem?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[quade 4]

Ron --

Take a look at this article.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5675992/site/newsweek/

For me this isn't a red vs blue issue, it's about people taking advantage of a situation, giving themselves unquestionable power and not being accountable to the masses.

People should be as concerned with the rest of their rights as much if not more than simply the one guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Ron 10]

I don't have a problem with the CIA working in the US.

I think that some of our intelegence problems were due to us haveing too damn many agencies.

NSA
CIA
FBI

ONE agency might have been able to piece together the needed intel...Three or more (more) didn't have the big picture.

And what is the current recomendation? Make ANOTHER agency...What crap. How about we combine them all into ONE?

Thats better than an "oversite" agency.

Quote

People should be as concerned with the rest of their rights as much if not more than simply the one guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment allows us to resist what we don't like.

It is the power behind the others.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Kennedy 0]

The difference is that the government is supposed to recognize more rights for Americans (well, supposed to be restricted by rights) than for enemy governments.

The FBI doesn't belong on that list. They should face domestic law enforcement and focus on that.

Keep the FBI focused "in our own backyard" and make the others go through them so that things are applied in a consistent fashion.

I would support, however, merging the NRO, NSA, DIA and most of the other TLA agencies. (the entire CIA should just disappear)

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[quade 4]

Quote

The Second Amendment allows us to resist what we don't like.

It is the power behind the others.

The 2nd Amendment was written so that we could protect ourselves against invaders, not our own government. To say otherwise is just silly. I'll give you that it has been interpreted in the last 50 or so years to be a LOT of different things, but orginally it had nothing to do with the possibility of overthrowing our own government as a last resort.

Think about it.

If you really needed to protect yourself against the government, having permission -from- the government to do so isn't going to work.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Ron 10]

Quote

The 2nd Amendment was written so that we could protect ourselves against invaders, not our own government. To say otherwise is just silly. I'll give you that it has been interpreted in the last 50 or so years to be a LOT of different things, but orginally it had nothing to do with the possibility of overthrowing our own government as a last resort.

Think about it.

Think about the fact that it was written by a group of men that DID overthrow the government they had when it stopped listening to them.

Like it or not, the Second Amendment allows us to remain free because we will always have another option to blindly accepting the governments choices.

If we no longer have a voice in our government a second revolution could happen....But only if we have guns.

Quote

If you really needed to protect yourself against the government, having permission -from- the government to do so isn't going to work.

Ya think thats why so many government types want gun bans? And why so many regular folk do not want them?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

The 2nd Amendment was written so that we could protect ourselves against invaders, not our own government.

orginally it had nothing to do with the possibility of overthrowing our own government as a last resort.

Not true. Several founding fathers did write things about tyrants and our own government. "Security of a free state" does not only apply to foreign attacks.

Quote

If you really needed to protect yourself against the government, having permission -from- the government to do so isn't going to work.

If a person is concerned about the government but not so nuts that they think the revolutions starts tomorrow, they'll want to keep the tools at hand, rather than let the people they don't trust intervene.

But you make the point for them. If you need to protect yourself from the government, don't let them be the ones to decide how you do it.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*