"because the CIA hasn’t been right about one thing since it was organized in 1947."
My response included "The CIA obviously isn't always correct either - that would be an equally stupid statement to make. But that doesn't make your "hasn't been right about one thing" statement any less ridiculous", which you continue to dispute. Hence, here we are. Now on to your most recent response.
First, you accused me of failing to provide one example of the CIA getting a single thing right since 1947, which of course would disprove your point. So, I gave you the example of the CIA properly locating OBL in Abbottabad, Pakistan, so that elements of SEAL Team 6 could take him out. You completely ignored that in your response -- like it was never said. I also gave you another one that was a direct quote from Tim Weiner, the author of the book you said I should read...
"The CIA told the president 36 times in early 2001 that Al-Qaeda was planning to strike the United States." You responded with:
What? Did they have that info when Bubba Clinton was still in office until January 20, 2001...."
The fact that you apparently were unaware of this ("What?") until I pointed it out confirms that you are very ill-informed, and do not know what you are talking about. This fact came out not long after the attacks themselves. In fact, I still remember reading about one warning from around August 8, 2001 or so, which was confirmed in testimony included in the 9/11 Commission Report -- which I also have read in its entirety. And again, this is something your own source says occurred.
Oh, and by the way, your source Tim Weiner himself never made the same ridiculous claim that you did -- that "the CIA hasn’t been right about one thing since it was organized in 1947." That's not from him -- that's something you made up.
You can pretend that the CIA has done more good than harm, history will prove you wrong time and time again.
Stop lying about what I've said. I said nothing about "more harm than good". That's a relative comparison about which people might disagree. I said only that your claim that "the CIA hasn't gotten one thing right since it was organized in 1947" was ridiculous. And it is still ridiculous.
And by the way, I've been here a lot longer than you, since 1997...28 years total, no breaks, no suspensions, so I'm hardly a keyboard warrior. I would have been long gone by now.
Uh, I hate to tell you, but sitting behind a keyboard since 1997 as if that makes you an expert is the very definition of a "keyboard warrior". It's literally someone whose only battles fought have been at a keyboard.
There are other people who have actually participated in military/intelligence matters in the real world -- not just from behind a keyboard -- who know and have experienced things that you have not.
That comment didn't have quotes around it, so of course it wasn't from Weiner. It was my own words, based on my own opinion, based on material and sources provided in Weiner's book. Are you that ignorant? You think I made it up? You seem to believe that people aren't entitled to formulate their own opinions on things.
The CIA has been more wrong than they've ever been right. They've created more clusterf*cks than solved problems. That's my own opinion too, so please don't misconstrue and think that's a Tim Weiner comment. I own it.
I didn't bother reading any more of your comment you claim I ignored, because whatever happened with the CIA and OBL, wasn't in the book. I said the book went up to George W. Bush's administration. It did not cover Obama's two terms, so who is the stupid one now? I also told you that Weiner published a follow-up book that I have not yet purchased, nor read. You might want to try a reading comprehension course.
"In fact, I still remember reading about one warning from around August 8, 2001..."
That ain't early 2001. You're obviously no "expert" either, although you'd like to think of yourself as one.
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks on the United States - The System Was Blinking Red
Those warnings the CIA passed on to Bush, according to the National Commission, were mostly threats that appeared to be focused overseas, not at home. There were several reports that Osama bin Laden wanted to attack the US, but there was never any detailed specifics provided.
In the end, had Bill Clinton not taken the 1993 WTC bombing as having been conducted by "lone wolves" as the FBI described them, treated terrorists as simple criminals in a courtroom, and accepted the offers to be given Osama bin Laden, perhaps 9/11 never would have happened.