It's not called "The Learning Channel" for nothin'.
Posted on 12/11/2005 7:03:11 AM PST by Leisler
On Aug. 2, Dafna Linzer of the Washington Post reported that "a major U.S. intelligence review has projected that Iran is about a decade away from manufacturing the key ingredient for a nuclear weapon, roughly doubling the previous estimate of five years." On Dec. 5, the Jerusalem Post reported that Mohammed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, "confirmed Israel's assessment that Iran is only a few months away from creating an atomic bomb. My, how time flies. It hasn't seemed as if 10 years have elapsed since last summer.
(Excerpt) Read more at post-gazette.com ...
Damn straight!
The roar of an idea whose time has come.
Great article. Especially all the information about how to do it correctly after you destroy it.
Fire them enmass. Probably not a word, but you all know what I mean.
It's not called "The Learning Channel" for nothin'.
The single most actively, aggressively, and openly hostile, anti-American organization in the world, is the U.S. Department of State. All those ivy league libs had to get a job somewhere, eh?
Abolish all three of them!
Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former CIA operative in the Middle East, sees little hope the agency can be reformed:
One disgruntled former employee... (The late) Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
The Bush administration suffered major embarrassment when it was disclosed that the United States was holding top al-Qaida suspects in "secret prisons" in eastern Europe and North Africa.So who disclosed this, and why?
Is the Agency infested with Clinton Era appointees whose desire to 'get' Bush exceeds prudence or their oath to keep secrets secret?
It sure looks that way.
Are all of the people who work there of that persuasion? No. Certainly not.
There appear to be a few people there who cannot keep their mouths shut, who are setting the administration up either for political gain for the Dems, to keep information held on them quiet (FBI file, anyone?), or who are not deserving of handling anything more secret than a school lunch menu.
Is that the whole agency? No.
As for budget, it is easy to hide the expenses in an obviously unsuccessful operation that are incurred by something you will never hear about. Think about that.
Does the media ballyhoo every screwup, real or generated?
Of course, especially when it can be used to make the current administration look bad, regardless of the results otherwise.
Does the media ever ballyhoo about successful operatons? How would they?
As for HUMINT sources, anyone remember how Madeline Albright's crew lost two unencrypted, non-password protected laptops in eastern Europe with the names of intel contacts across southern Asia and the Middle East? And then announced the loss (and the type of data the laptops contained) on CNN?
Someone went from not only having found a neat computer, to getting the cybernetic equivalent of a winning Powerball ticket. I have little doubt that there were those who would have offered tidy sums for the machines.
That kinda thinned the herd of HUMINT contacts, because the laptops were not recovered by us.
Recall, too, that among other Agencies, the CIA was effectively hobbled by the Gorelick Memo, and has enjoyed emnity of the folks at State for a while.
The computer thing was a typical State Dept. screwup, from the same outfit that brought the Bay of Pigs to an inevitably bad conclusion by convincing Kennedy to call off the air strikes which would have changed the outcome of the invasion.
In fact, if they had not given creedence to the NY Times article proclaiming Castro and Che as the people's choices in their rush to oust Batista, then there would be casinos in Cuba, and more really good cigars here.
I'd think long and hard before I did away with the Agency, but I'd for damned sure find out where the leaks are and plug them.
This whole MSM attack on the CIA is there for a reason, and if you think of who they serve at the alphabet news agencies, you'd have a second thought about buying into anything they propose.
After all, they have done so well at providing us with a balanced view of what is happening in Iraq. (no agendae there, no siree).
As for getting rid of agencies, I'd start with my all time favorite, the BATF(E).
Ron Paul ping. :)
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.