To: T L Comiskey who wrote (19326 ) 5/20/2003 1:21:49 PM From: Mannie Respond to of 89467 The spook club takes care of it's own. The choice of poindexter shows the absolute contempt this administration has for the American people. An admitted liar as the keeper of the most sensitive information.....perfect. Is John Poindexter really the best bet for this job? Asheville Citizen-Times POSTED: Feb. 20, 2002 7:02 p.m. From the "say what?'' department comes news that John Poindexter is back in government. Poindexter, who turned a famed naval career into an infamous stint as the scandal-tarred national security adviser under Ronald Reagan, has been quietly named to head a new Pentagon office. Poindexter was a central figure in the Iran-Contra affair, a scandal that hamstrung the Reagan presidency from 1985 on. For those not keeping score at home, the scandal revolved around selling arms to Iran (in violation of U.S. law) and funneling the profits to thuggish Nicragauan "contra'' fighters (also against the law). Poindexter stated "I made a very deliberate decision not to tell the president so that I could insulate him from the decision and provide some future deniability for the president if it ever leaked out.'' Poindexter was convicted of five felonies in 1990: conspiring to obstruct official inquiries and proceedings, obstructing Congress (two counts) and false statements (two counts). The convictions were overturned by an appellate court on the grounds Poindexter had been granted immunity in his testimony on the matter before Congress. Among other things, Poindexter destroyed more than 5,000 computer messages relating to the matter during the height of the scandal. He also apparently destroyed the only presidential authorization of the matter - one which, in Ronald Reagan's defense, allegedly only retroactively OK'd actions previously taken, presumably without the president's knowledge. Poindexter will head the Information Awareness Office. The IAO, according to the Associated Press, "will focus on new kinds of military threats, including terrorist organizations.'' According to the British newspaper The Guardian, the IAO "will supply federal officials with `instant' analysis on what is being written on e-mail and said on phones all over the U.S.'' Putting aside all other issues, you have to ask: Do we really want someone with a proven track record of hiding information from the public, of creating his own foreign policy, implementing it, destroying records of it and then lying about it someone we want in charge of such a sensitive office? Is someone who likely would've gotten away with running a secret government within the government if he'd remembered to erase the backup tapes worth trusting? Finally, is this the best we can do? The answer to all those questions is almost certainly "no.''