Posted on 11/01/2010 9:06:46 AM PDT by bayouranger
On October 21, we told you that a DoD official had leaked the findings of a confidential investigation into Michael Furlong and his highly successful Force Protection program to the New York Times. The leak was authorized in an effort to embarrass Furlong and “make him go away.” The New York Times subsequently held off on the story, but a week later someone else ran with it.
On October 29, Kimberly Dozier of the Associated Press published a piece entitled Pentagon Says Intel Contractors Went Too Far. Here’s what’s troubling.
(Excerpt) Read more at bigpeace.com ...
Any thoughts?
Also:
3 days ago, this article was placed at the AP:
Thanx again.
Wow...Brad Thor. I’m even more intrigued!
This scenario sounds familiar. Hmm, where have I heard it before?
Oh yeah! I remember! The Dems used it on Bush to deny that they had, in fact, been briefed on the details of the war operations.
Right out of the old DemoKraut play book!
Thanks for posting. Very interesting on many levels. At one of the lowest levels...who is Kimberly Dozier and what is her background/history of articles/leanings. Follow the propagandists and their enablers.
Well, I must admit, I’ve already sent her an email BUT I may have went off half cocked...
Now, before I apologize, which I’m not above doing when wrong, I came here for some insight.
Thanx PGalt.
This tells me that there are obviously people more interested in winning petty insider bureaucratic battles than in winning the war.
The New York Times subsequently held off on the story, but a week later someone else ran with it.
looks like the msm has poker games and the chips a news items.
Thanx!
I’ll retract.
Thoughts? Bob Gates is a clueless Kafkaesque bureacrazi who would sell his mother down the river if his keepers asked him to.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.