Posted on 03/12/2004 5:51:37 AM PST by Tolik
The truth is that almost everybody in the world believes that the war had something to do with WMDs and nothing to do with Halliburton.
Leftists appear to want it both ways. They want to de-fund the CIA, require the agency to pour its manpower and resources into politically correct garbage programs, and also do the job it was originally defined to do. Not possible.
Have you ever visited the CIA's website? Don't. Not if you want to keep your supper down.
There’s a nice section called 'Diversity in the CIA' containing a fourteen-paragraph statement by Director Tenet, which ends with the assurance that diversity will be one of the most powerful tools we have to help make the world a safer place.
I don't know about the rest of you, but in my personal toolbox for making my world a safer place, diversity is thrown in with the miscellaneous small screws. A strong military/intelligence complex, a sound economy, and leadership that exhibits Constitutional faithfulness represent the hammers and saws and drills.
In addition to the diversity statement, there is a list of 'affinity groups that the CIA supports – and membership in these groups is open to all CIA employees.' Included in the list of CIA-supported groups are:
(1) ANGLE -- the Agency Network of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Trans-Gendered Employees ('provides internal networking support and education to the overall Agency regarding issues relating to sexual orientation and the workplace. Efforts are geared toward fostering the principles of diversity and creating opportunities for information sharing and open discussions at all levels of the Agency').
(2) The Asian Pacific American Organization ('assists in recruiting, mentoring, counseling, and monitoring the advancement of Asian American officers ... ')
(3) Black Executive Board (' ... provides guidance to black employees and senior management on all matters affecting recruiting, hiring, retention, networking, assignments, promotions, and career development opportunities')
(4) Blacks in Government ('a national response to the need for African Americans in public service to organize around issues of mutual concern and to use their collective strength to confront workplace and community problems')
(5) Hispanic Advisory Council (' ... promotes Hispanic activities, initiatives, and programs').
ANGLE normally organizes a CIA special event each year in which the CIA celebrates gay pride month. Several years ago, the CIA's feature speaker at their gay pride celebration was Barney Frank (he of the involvement with a gay prostitute). This year there was no gay pride celebration, but only because ANGLE was otherwise busy 'focusing on working to change certain internal CIA policies that affect them'.
It's interesting that those who are calling for Director Tenet's head because of his department's (supposed) failure to provide reliable intelligence regarding the existence of WMDs in Iraq are the very same leftist ideologues who insist on spending taxpayer dollars on bogus PC programs, and diverting intelligence agents’ attention away from the very national security matters they are claiming have been compromised.
Number 1: The weapons of mass destruction that were present in Iraq pre-war (and they were there, or Saddam would not have been stonewalling the inspectors ad infinitum) are now most likely in Syria or Libya.
Number 2: The mass graves and verified (by the thousands) stories of concentration-camp-like torture chambers are proof enough that our overthrow of the Hussein regime was justified, to all but those who are too blind to see (or too leftist-ideology-driven to acknowledge).
Number 3: If we had found WMDs, there would be another reason to criticize this administration (the WMDs were not of the specified type, or there were not a sufficient number of them, or they were planted by the administration to save face, or some other equally ludicrous, disingenuous, politically motivated whine.)
I am disgusted with this President's liberal spending habits, and disastrous monetary/economic policies. But his war/foreign policy accomplishments would never have been achieved under a John Kerry administration. Come this November, we are not going to be faced with a lesser of two evils choice. This time it will be a choice between (1) weak, watered-down-beyond-recognition 'pseudo-conservative' domestic policies combined with strong foreign policy, (2) deadly (in the absolute literal sense of the word) socialist/globalist/one-world elitist leadership that bears no allegiance to this republic, or (3) a third party candidate whose vision, priorities, and allegiance to the Constitution are probably far superior to that of (1) or (2) but who hasn't a prayer of attaining the Presidency.
I received a private reply from a FReeper friend this afternoon which read, in part, 'Now due solely to Bush's own behavior and RINO-like governing he may lose anyway, but, it won't happen because he didn't get my vote ... '
In spite of all my sometimes bluster about 'voting on principle' this year, I'm with him on this. The prospect of a Kerry presidency paints a much more nightmarish picture than anything President Bush's brush could produce, even under the worst of circumstances.
The most painful realization in all of this is that I genuinely believe that, despite the erosive influence of illegal immigration and the ignorance and apathy of the populace as a whole, the majority of the American people do not embrace the ultra-leftist ideologies that John Kerry represents. Yet the beautifully crafted lies upon which he will run (both those he will fabricate about his opponent, and those which will artfully describe his 'altruistic, liberty-loving' goals) will be widely disseminated by the mainstream media. Kerry’s deceit will be relatively unquestioned, as will be his relatively baseless criticisms of his opponent. And I have very little faith that the average American voter has yet learned to see through the lies that promise him individual liberty and deliver socialistic bondage.
The Clinton years severely weakened this republic in all meaningful ways (moral/economic/domestic/military). President Bush has allowed further economic and domestic erosion, yet he has made significant progress in pulling this country out of our moral and military morass. But we are nowhere near recovered enough to revert back to another four years of Clintonesque leadership. The world has become, and will continue to be, far too dangerous for us to once again elect as leader of the free world a pathological, dishonest man with no respect for the Constitution or American national sovereignty.
Semi-apologies for the meandering rant. I don't get to post very often lately, so I tend to want to squeeze lots of 'stuff' into each occasional one. :)
~ joanie
There really isn't a choice here, Kerry's gotta be denied.
Anyone who thinks they're going to "punish" this POTUS by not voting or voting 3rd party have a rude surprise coming.
A Kerry presidency will make Clinoccio's 8 years actually look like "The most ethical administration in history" by comparison.
So to those who're adament it couldn't (possibly) get any worse, they're dead wrong.
...it can & will with a JFKerry in the WH.
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.