General Michael V. Hayden comes to the post of CIA director with impressive credentials. Besides having had practical overseas experience and his tour as National Security Agency director, and therefore knowledgeable about the intel community bureaucracy, his having worked with National Intelligence czar John Negroponte will serve him well in the forthcoming shifts in CIA roles & missions. 

The fact that he stoutly defended NSA's terrorist surveillance program ensures he'll be attacked by Democrats during confirmation hearings.  Judiciary Commitee chairman Specter's comment on FOX News Sunday that he'll use his committee's role in the nomination to stir the ashes of the "warrantless wiretaps" issue foreshadows more self—serving grandstanding by that famous expert on Scottish law and another GOP self—inflicted wound. 

House Intel Commitee Hoekstra's concerns about having a military officer heading a civilian agency are just plain wrong—headed.  President Bush is selecting the right man, the most qualified person for the job. Period. And the CIA, like the military itself, answers ultimately to the commander—in—chief and chief executive, President Bush, with Congressional oversight. 

Whether he's uniformed military or a civilian is immaterial. Turning the issue around, would naming a civilian ensure a better outcome?  Is there a civilian candidate with experience & expertise equal to that of Gen. Hayden?  The main issue here is maintaining national security during the global war on terror, specifically the CIA's role in that vital effort.  Gen. Hayden will help ensure that it succeeds in that mission.

John B. Dwyer    5 08 06