Congress Not Told of Covert Action as Required by Law

Originally posted by RRconservative

I supported Iran-Contra also. During that time we had another hate America 1st Congress. The Contras were fighting against a Communist regeime, but Congress refused to help them out because they had a love-affair with Communist Daniel Ortega. Something had to be done, and Oliver North was the man to do it! Oliver North, now that is a great American!

When someone posts opinions on this site, I didn't realize they were for sale?

Have you ever received money for your posts? If not, does that mean no one was buying what you were saying???

so you supported illegally supplying arms to Iran, so they could illegally aid the contras......not to mention the illegal supply of drugs that susposedly was part of the deal...

okay, but well, I don't really want to hear about how Iran is this great danger now, since if it served any off the wall purpose to the present administration to do it, they'd be selling them more weapons, or whatever else they chose to, only because it was a means to an end. Because, this is how our fine government operates....with no thought for the future, no thought of the national security, and no thought of current laws or treaties, just how they can move the chess pieces to obtain their current goal...

But, half of the congress is too dangerous to trust to handle sensitive security information......

Originally posted by xpert11
TheBorg I like your idea but I do have a few questions to ask.
How would you prevent the average joes who are appointed from doing the politicians partisan bidding ?

Their jobs are simply to report TO Congress on the doings of the private covert ops divisions. Why would the politicians bid to keep these people from telling them what's going on, unless they already know? Kinda defeats the whole purpose for their being there, now don't you think?

Who would appoint these people to the oversight committee ?

The state governments should be able to select someone from each state to go.

Would the people ID be kept secret in order to avoid having off shore intel agency's target the committee members ?

Of course. They'd be as incognito as those on covert missions. They'd only report to Congress once they got back, and they'd do so in person. Hope this helps.

TheBorg

Originally posted by TheBorg
Their jobs are simply to report TO Congress on the doings of the private covert ops divisions. Why would the politicians bid to keep these people from telling them what's going on, unless they already know? Kinda defeats the whole purpose for their being there, now don't you think?

You missed my point maybe I wasn't very clear.
I asking what was to stop the average joes from leaking details of covert ops to the public for political gain ?
In other words members of the oversight committee could leak sensitive details for political gain and the politicians could look blameless.
How do you prevent the oversight committee from becoming infected by poisonous partisanship and just becoming another tool for American politicians ?

xpert11,

You bring up a good point, and one that I'll need to think on for a bit. You might have me on this one. Nice comeback!

TheBorg