|
"I know nothing about this, other than what I've read," she said. "My position has consistently been that I believe the agency is best-served by having an intelligence professional in charge at this time." The top Republican on the committee, Missouri Sen. Kit Bond, was similarly skeptical. "Job number one at the CIA is to track down and stop terrorists. In a post-9/11 world, intelligence experience would seem to be a prerequisite for the job of CIA director," he said. "I will be looking hard at Panetta's intelligence expertise and qualifications." The former senior CIA official who advises Obama defended the choice of Panetta. He said he was selected for his administrative, management and political skills, which will allow him both to control and advocate for the agency. Veterans of the CIA were surprised at the pick. "I'm at a loss," said Robert Grenier, a former director of the CIA's counterterrorism center and a 27-year veteran of the agency, who now is managing director of Kroll, a security consulting company. He said Panetta is at "a tremendous disadvantage." "Intelligence by its very nature is an esoteric world. And right now the agency is confronted with numerous pressing challenges overseas, and to have no background is a serious deficit. I don't say that he can't succeed. It may that he can compensate for the obvious deficit." Panetta served on the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan panel that released a report at the end of 2006 with dozens of recommendations for reversing course in the war. Like Panetta, Blair could face an uncomfortable confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee. In 2006, Blair resigned from his top position at the Pentagon-funded, nonprofit Institute for Defense Analyses after the Senate Armed Services Committee raised concerns about possible conflicts of interest. After leaving the Navy, Blair became the institute's president while serving on the boards of two defense contractors that worked on the F-22 fighter jet. He participated in two reviews of the F-22, including one that endorsed an Air Force proposal to buy the F-22 on three-year contracts rather than one-year contracts. The longer-term contracts would financially benefit F-22 contractors by guaranteeing a multibillion-dollar revenue stream for three years. A 2006 Pentagon inspector general's report found that Blair took no action to influence the outcome of either of the two studies. Blair and Panetta would replace retired Adm. Mike McConnell and former Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden, respectively. Both career military intelligence officers said publicly they would stay in their positions if asked.
[Associated
Press;
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
News | Sports | Business | Rural Review | Teaching & Learning | Home and Family | Tourism | Obituaries
Community |
Perspectives
|
Law & Courts |
Leisure Time
|
Spiritual Life |
Health & Fitness |
Teen Scene
Calendar
|
Letters to the Editor