New C.I.A. Chief Tells Workers to Back Administration Policies

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Nov 17, 2004.

  1. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #1
    link

    whoa.

    this is what we get under the bush regime (yes, i'm tired of saying administration). whence curiosity, open debate, compromise and room for changing opinion? this is what will kill this country.

    more than anything else lately, i've been dividing people into the curious and non-curious. and i'm finding that everyone i hang out with, like and respect fall into the "curious" category.

    bush can't even be bothered to read a newspaper. what a joke.
     
  2. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #2
    There's an old, old saying that if you're dumb, surround yourself with smart people...and if you're smart, surround yourself with smart people who disagree with you.

    (God only knows which of those categories Bush falls into. But either way he's not doing it.)

    So this is just more consolidation of power. Ve vill not haff any dissent in zis administration!
     
  3. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #3
    but if one is dumb, will they know to do this?
     
  4. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #4
    At the risk of mixing metaphors, how does the saying " the squeaky wheel gets the grease" apply when "all the wheels have come off"?

    Interesting strategy. I use "interesting" as any other (more) appropriate adjective would be too depressing this morning.
     
  5. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #5
    While it's probably an appropriate sentiment (not actively championing opposition to the president as an agent) the wording is less than sensitive. The CIA shouldn't be making or dictating policy. That should fall to the president and his advisors.
     
  6. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #6
    my read is that it's more insidious -- the new policy will affect the analysis, which is supposed to be completely free of policy considerations. it seems clear that, over the past few years, the "wrong" iraq analyses were unwelcome, and now that will be policy.
     
  7. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #7
    Well, here's a perfect example of what can happen when workers are afraid to disagree with their supervisor:


    'Nuff said.
     
  8. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #8
    Even though you may not like the President, you still have to do your job and keep quiet.

    When you're doing this job, it really isn't your job to play politics publicly or hinder your own organization.

    It makes everyone look bad when you do, let the face men of the agency play politics.

    So while the message isn't exactly a bad one, the delivery (wording) and the explanation behind it are less than ideal.
     
  9. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #9
    The CIAs job is to provide intelligence, why the need for directives concerning whose policies to respect or support?

    The CIA aren't the GOP, they are not the RNC, they are the CIA. They gather intelligence, this one is pretty hard to spin folks. The Whitehouse is looking for specific information and they'll have interference from those bothered by facts or the truth it seems.

    The Whitehouse should have reprimanded itself after the last intelligence gaffe concerning Iraq, but are now trying to make the CIA toe the line even more.

    I fail to see where values apply to this Administration.
     
  10. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #10
    collection is only half the CIA's job. the other is analysis. i fear for the latter.
     
  11. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #11
    I think that is what is under attack with this directive.
     
  12. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #12
    Isn't this the problem with appointing to head the CIA a career, partisan politician like Porter Goss?
     
  13. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #13
    I thought that's what I said...
     
  14. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #14
    I missed the part where you were talking about the career peons ducking and keeping their mouth shut until the political landscape changes.

    It's not like the CIA needs to keep the public confident that the entire organization is working together publically, while they talk around the water cooler about the idiots in charge behind closed doors.
     
  15. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #15
    It is in the interpreting of the data that one's personal views can enter into an analysis. Several commentaries about CIA mid- and upper-level people not being objective have been publicized recently. It seems to me that the totality of Goss' statement indicates that he wants objectivity.

    See Jack Wheeler's columns in World Net Daily about CIA middle- and upper-echelon people. I read a lot of his stuff back when he wrote for Strategic Investment (financial newsletter) and he's quite astute at viewing world events.

    An analyst with a personal axe to grind can create intelligence failures which can result in events like the destruction of the World Trade Center--which is why the CIA is not supposed to "support" or "subvert" the policies of ANY administration/regime.

    'Rat
     
  16. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #16
    It's also why you aren't supposed to stovepipe or cherrypick intel. Looking at only the parts that support your views is just as bad as someone else looking at the intel and championing opposition based on their own selective use of the data. It's why you shouldn't have an 'Office of Strategic Plans'.
     
  17. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #17
    Well, looks like two more of the CIA's top guys decided not to play ball with the new regime.


    Undercover or not, I'd like to see an anonymous tell-all book by at least one of these guys. In fact, I have a feeling books by former Bush officials could turn into a whole new industry in this country.
     
  18. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #18
    So in reference to "Repubicans are shocked, SHOCKED, that this could happen!" that thread, did the Democrats ever try anything on this level?

    It's a wonder they lost power at all if they were so evil.
     

Share This Page