Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Nov 15, 2004.
a tad stalin-esque, eh?
Oh, yeah. Let's not have any independent, critical thought in an agency as important as the CIA. What we want is yes men!
I mean, really:
What Bush may look upon as liberal obstructionists, you or I might call principled patriots.
This is bad, very bad, and portends even more manufactured "intelligence" used as justification to invade even more countries.
The only upside is, watch for a slew of books written by "anonymous" people, telling even more about what goes on inside Bush's CIA.
Not that those books are going to prevent further belligerent adventurism by a guy who clearly values piety and cant over information and reason.
The CIA is a liberal hotbed? I'd never heard that before, but Porter Goss would sure be the guy you'd want in charge if you were purging the opposition from the ranks.
I wonder how the rank-and-file of the CIA feel about being called a bunch of liberals?
Seriously, is anyone the least bit surprised by this political housecleaning after the appointment of Porter Goss as director?
I think this smacks more of 1984 than anything from this administration yet.
The CIA, a hotbed of liberals?
I wish there was a "frightened" emoticon.
I wonder if this is an indication of what is to come and why so many people are leaving this administration.
Though it should mean that we will get a lot of tell alls and the like.
Don't forget, this is the same Porter Goss who said of himself, "I couldn't get a job with the CIA today. I am not qualified."
Is there one for "which way to Canada?"
In fairness, that quote is taken a bit out of context. What disturbed me about the Goss appointment was his history as a highly partisan member of Congress and an opponent of the 9-11 Commission's reform recommendations. If ever the CIA needed a director who was above politics it is now, but instead, Bush went entirely in the other direction. So it surprises me not at all that Goss is playing the part of the Great Expunger. I predict the second Bush term is going to be all about ideological purity. This is very probably only the beginning of the purge.
I'd hoped that someone's theory would be correct.
They'd said that with Bush no longer needing to appeal to his extremist base, he'd back off some of his more radical stances and be a little more relaxed, a little more moderate.
Nope; we're ****ed.
Who said that? Surely it wasn't me.
I forget where I'd heard or read that.
It offered a glimmer of hope, and I clung to it.
zim, what was that you'd said a national "brain-drain" portends?
eh, what's some prunning of the dead leaves? Isn't it a good thing that the White House will be more likely to get the intel it wants?
Not qualified to be a covert agent. Big difference between saying "I'm not qualified to work covertly in the field anymore" and "I'm not qualified to sit behind the big desk at CIA HQ."
I can't believe you just said that!
As opposed to the intel it needs?
Not to be picky, but when did he make that distinction?
Yeah, I was trying to be subtle & sarcastic saying the White House just wants to hear what it wants to hear.
The distiction has always been there (between heading up the CIA vs working as a field agent). But depending on who uses the quote they might not make that clear.
My heartfelt apologies for taking you seriously...
I'm confused because I've never heard the guy who said it make the distinction.
well, w/o these humble forums, Jef was advancing that position. In the wide world, I believe that some WashPost and NYT Editorialists were saying the same. Can't remember who, perhaps Friedman?
I was hopeful too.
Has a nice Nazi ring to it....