Intercepted communications

Update: April 27, 2005 Questions being sent to Bolton cover a wide swath of issues.

Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., is pursuing more information about Bolton's request for the identity of 10 U.S. officials involved in secret National Security Agency communications during the past four years.

Dodd spokesman Marvin Fast said Dodd is also seeking e-mails and logs relating to Bolton's communications with intelligence analysts over testimony he was preparing to give in 2002 about whether Cuba was developing chemical and biological weapons.

Bolton clashed with intelligence analyst Christian P. Westermann earlier in 2002, when the CIA worker tried to change language in a speech Bolton was giving about Cuba. The committee is seeking to interview Westermann again.

Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico asked the Foreign Relations Committee to find out if the NSA intercepted some of his conversations and whether Bolton sought access to them, said Bill Sparks, a spokesman for the governor.

These included conversations with former Secretary of State Colin Powell and North Korean diplomats, with whom he was talking in an effort to stop their nuclear weapons program.

Richardson, a Democrat and former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, was in contact with the North Koreans in January 2003, shortly after becoming governor, and informed Powell of his efforts.

Update: April 20, 2005 -Bolton Accuses Decorated Navy Veteran and State Department Analyst of Going Behind His Back-

Update 3:30pm: Mr. McClellan said Wednesday that the White House was "in touch" with Mr. Voinovich to help him resolve any doubts. (no doubt!)

Democratic members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee talk prior to a meeting to vote on John Bolton to be U. S. ambassador to the United Nations. Left to right are Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., and Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. (AP Photo/Dennis Cook)

"Follow your heart, not your head, cause your head will tell you not to screw around with the president's nominee," Biden pleaded.

After two hours of rancorous debate and repeated attempts by the Republican chair to call a vote, Ohio Republican George Voinovich spoke up. "I've heard enough today that I don't feel comfortable voting for Mr. Bolton," he said. Several Republicans on the committee echoed that sentiment, delaying the vote.

Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, the committee's ranking Democrat, said Bolton "repeatedly sought to exaggerate the intelligence" on weapons of mass destruction programs in Iraq, Cuba and Syria. He said Bolton would have little credibility in the world community if future threats emerge. "In the next few years, we're going to have a crisis, God knows, in Korea. We're going to have a crisis relative to Iraq. We're going to have a crisis relative to possibly Syria," Biden said. "We're going to have crises about what these guys are doing, what weapons they have, don't have, and what their intentions are. And Mr. Bolton is our spokesperson up there?"

Bolton, who is currently the top arms control official in the U.S. State Department, may now be called to testify again about his personal behavior with colleagues.

Some accusers have approached the committee independently. Melody Townsel, a Dallas businesswoman, claimed that an angry Mr. Bolton chased her through a Russian hotel and threw objects at her during a conference a decade ago. In a letter, she said he was "genuinely behaving like a madman. I eventually retreated to my hotel room and stayed there. Mr. Bolton then routinely visited me to pound on the door and shout threats." Ms. Townsel was a subcontractor for the U.S. Agency for International Development at the time she and Bolton worked together.

The most publicized incident of Bolton's took place three years ago, when Bolton planned to give a speech stating that, “The United States believes that Cuba has a developmental offensive biological warfare program and is providing assistance to other rogue state programs.” It’s worth stressing that this wasn’t merely Bolton saying that he believed Cuba had a biological warfare program. This was Bolton stating that the United States thought so. And, needless to say, he was and is entirely wrong, as the intelligence community has explicitly not reached any such conclusions. (The parallel to the Bush administration’s misuse and manipulation of intelligence on pre-invasion Iraq is too perfect not to mention here.) (Read the story below this one for a full account of what Bolton did after he was told he "could not" use that language)

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, with 10 Republicans and only eight Democrats, was expected to approve Bolton’s nomination, and indeed, most observers thought it was a done deal.

"Although the committee began with the chairman, Senator Richard Lugar saying that the vote was clear on the committee, the only thing clear at the close of the session was that allegations were becoming more numerous and the old adage, 'It's not over until it's over,' was the rule of the day," said CBS Foreign Affairs Analyst Pamela Falk.

Republican Senator George Voinovich of Ohio stunned his colleagues on the committee by saying he had heard enough to know that he did not “feel comfortable about voting for Mr. Bolton today”. Voinovich said he had changed his mind after testimony from Democratic Senator Christopher Dodd from Connecticut. “The passion on the other side on this, I don’t this, is political,”. “I think they raised some legitimate issues. I think we ought to find out what they are, I think we ought to get the information, get a chance to have [the allegations] rebutted.”

Picking up Voinovich’s lead, two other Republican senators also sought to delay the vote. Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, who had previously expressed doubts and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, who gave warning that he may not support Mr. Bolton’s nomination if it did move to the full Senate.

"The dynamic has changed. A lot of reservations surfaced today. It’s a new day," Senator Chafee said. Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware said they have found instances where Mr. Bolton’s Senate testimony did not seem to agree with the facts.

Democrats have accused Bolton of bullying intelligence analysts into changing their reports to reflect his assessment that “the United States believes that Cuba has a developmental offensive biological warfare program and is providing assistance to other rogue state programs”.

The committee also charged that Bolton had used his position as a senior State Department official to obtain details about intercepted communications involving other US officials monitored by the NSA. At least one Democratic senator, Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, D-Conn., said he would ask for a closed session so the committee could hear from intelligence officials about information Bolton requested relating to National Security Agency communications. According to a spokesman for Dodd, Bolton asked for and received the identities of 10 U.S. officials involved in such secret NSA interceptions during the past four years.

I wonder what those 10 U.S. Officials have to say about that. I also wonder why the National Security Agency was monitoring those United States Officials, don't you? How did Bolton find out about them in the first place and why was he interested in them? Were they committing espionage? Were they Democrats, Republicans, Green Party? How high up were they? Were they Military? Scientists? What? What, was Boltons interest in finding out the identies of the officials of the NSA communication interception?

Why was he [Bolton] allowed to do this? Surely a State Department official does not have the right to get details of communications that NSA intercepts, does he? Something smells fishy here! Where are the investigative reporters when you need them?

Despite the allegations Bush stands by Bolton as does U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. She said Wednesday that President Bush's nomination of John Bolton as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations should go forward, and she criticized the debate over his conduct. "I would certainly hope that this would be brought soon to conclusion," Rice told CNN in Moscow as she visits Russia for the first time as the top U.S. Diplomat."The president deserves to have the person at the U.N. that he thinks best to carry out this job. I think we make a mistake when suddenly comments about management style become part of the confirmation process."

Wow, "comments". "Management style". I am speechless.

"We need to get John Bolton to the United Nations because it is an important position," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. "We need to get him there sooner rather than later." McClellan, slapping the folks that brought their testimony to the committee, said Bolton faces "trumped-up" allegations, and said the Bush administration is confident Bolton will be confirmed. Just because a position is important is not a reason to hurry through a nomination that is questionable.

Trumped-up? Again, I am speechless, well maby not.

Since when did abuse and harassment become management style? Those ARE the allegations not management style, and they should be looked into, if it is true, the WE THE PEOPLE don't want Bolton in that position.

Further, was there any criminal or illegal conduct in the interception of the NSA communications? I am truly surprised there were not more calls for testimony on this issue, thank goodness at least one did.

The UN will still be there next month, and the month after that too. What's the hurry folks? Afraid the public will find something out before Bolton is confirmed? Easy enough to confirm some of it anyway and hmm perhaps some of them did thus we have some dissension in the republican ranks. Call Colin Powell in to testify to back up any claims that Ford did indeed speak to Powell regarding Bolton's behavior. It seems such a simple thing to do. "Hello, Mr. Powell? Did Mr. Ford speak to you regarding Mr. Bolton's abusive behavior a couple of years ago?" "He did !?!" "Thank you, yes, have a nice day, Buh Bye Now". The other so called allegations (Cuba) are really not allegations as they are and have been confirmed for some time now, hello.

But Oh, Wait, the reason Powell is not called in to testify is painfully obvious even to Bolton.

In fact, Powell himself was sufficiently disturbed by Ford’s report, and the consequences that Bolton’s actions might have for the workings of the department in general, that he went to personally speak to all the members of the Bureau of Intelligence to reassure them that they should continue to “speak truth to power,” as he put it, and not let Bolton’s actions scare other analysts away from performing their jobs the way Westermann had. (I will translate the preceding sentence for emphasis: Powell had to assure his subordinates responsible for intelligence that they would not be fired for telling the truth. Please further note that no such assurance was or is being given to the CIA or military intelligence or anyone else working under George Bush, to which repeated demotions and termination's of anyone who criticizes the administration’s actions attest.)

The president may deserve to have who he picked in the U.N. but don't the people of the United States deserve to have the best person for the job in a sensitive position? The measure of a man is not how he treats his peers or his boss, but how he treats his inferiors. Ideology aside, this is a man of bad character, who doesn't understand fundamental respect for his fellow civil servant, let alone civil servants from other countries.

Bolton Accuses Decorated Navy Veteran and State Department Analyst of Going Behind His Back

Beware the munchkins!

04.12.05

Dennis Cook / The Associated Press John Bolton appears before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Capitol Hill Monday, April 11, 2005, on his nomination to be ambassador to the United States.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has started hearings on the appointment of John Bolton to be this country’s ambassador to the United Nations.

Democrats, whom Republicans outnumber 10 to 8 on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, assailed Bolton for his efforts to reassign two intelligence analysts who clashed with him over his claims that Cuba had biological weapons.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is reviewing allegations that Bolton misused intelligence and bullied subordinates to help buttress WMD hokum when he was at the State Department.

Senators questioned Carl W. Ford Jr., a former chief of the State Department's bureau of intelligence and research, about allegations that Bolton tried to have analyst Christian Westermann reassigned because he did not agree with the undersecretary's views about Cuba's weapons capability. Ford said Bolton was furious after Westermann questioned language he wanted to use in a speech. "I've never seen anybody quite like Secretary Bolton. ... I don't have a second, third or fourth in terms of the way that he abuses his power and authority with little people," Ford said.

Much of the questioning focused on Bolton's efforts to get two intelligence officers reassigned after they disagreed with him on an intelligence matter. Both objected to charges Bolton planned to make in a 2002 speech to the Heritage Foundation alleging that Cuba had a biological weapons program and was aiding other rogue states  and his appraisal of the weapons programs of Iran and other countries. Bolton was ordered to tone down the language.

Bolton accused Christian Westermann, a decorated Navy veteran and State Department analyst, of "going behind my back" in suggesting alternative language. He acknowledged that he had tried to get Westermann reassigned, saying, "I had lost confidence in him."

The man speakth out of both sides of his mouth! "I didn't seek to have these people fired. I didn't seek to have them discharged. I said I lost my trust in them," Bolton testified. 

But, Bolton complained to one of Westermann's superiors, Thomas Fingar, that as a presidential appointee, [he] Bolton "had every right to say what he believed, that he wasn't going to be told what he could say by a midlevel ... munchkin analyst," said Dodd, quoting testimony by Fingar to the committee staff. 

Do we really want this kind of person running the UN?

Officials said that Westermann was following standard procedure to clear classified information and that Bolton was trying to intimidate a lower-ranking official into supporting his point of view. At a time when U.S. credibility has been undermined by claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, Bolton's behavior was "dangerous," said Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.

His Senate confirmation to be U.N. ambassador still not assured, John R. Bolton is fending off Democrats attacking his integrity and officials complaining of his treatment of people who disagreed with his assessment of the nation's security dangers.

His style is ill suited for a U.N. post of such importance.  "You have nothing but disdain for the U.N.," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. "You can dance around it. You can run away from it. You can put perfume on it," she said. "It's hard for me to know why you'd want to work at an institution that you said didn't even exist."

Mr Bolton brushed over his record of castigating the UN as, variously, irrelevant, nonexistent and inherently flawed. He was optimistic he would make a success of the job.

A former undersecretary of State in charge of arms control, Bolton, 56, pledged if confirmed "to fulfill the president's vision of working in close partnership with the United Nations." He said he would help restore confidence in the world body, shaken by several recent scandals, and continue U.N. efforts to alleviate human suffering. 

I'm wondering how?  Perhaps you will storm in and fire all the countries representatives that disagree with you?  There is a laughable picture.

But some are finding in the hearings that Mr Bolton as an inflammatory figure who provoked mistrust among foes and allies alike and who would be incapable of brokering the kind of UN Security Council deals required to safeguard the US.

Bolton retains a go-it-alone attitude about U.S. foreign policy that is out of step with Bush's second-term pledge of international cooperation, said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.

He should not be confirmed. Bolton is a lawyer who does not respect law. He has many times flaunted his animosity toward the United Nations. He opposes the central principle of multilateralism on which the United Nations rests. He crudely advocates the nationalism of times past. He has been described as a man “trapped in the 19th century, like an insect in amber.”

Bolton attempts to use power to flail individuals with less power or those that do not agree with him. (Shades of Bush).

The United States needs to be well-represented in the United Nations. That calls for an outstanding American, gifted in diplomacy and thus able to evoke agreement in the interest of this country and the world.

We need in that position someone of broad and optimistic vision. Bolton is not that person.

The Senate Foreign Affairs Committee will question former State Department official Carl Ford, who clashed with Mr Bolton over intelligence evidence.

Meanwhile, committee Democrats meeting behind closed doors were interviewing Neil Silver, a senior department intelligence offiical and the  supervisor, AP news agency said.

www.voiceoffreedom.com