Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CIA Critic of U.S. War on Terror Resigns
Reuters ^ | 11/12/04 | Tabassum Zakaria

Posted on 11/12/2004 9:04:40 PM PST by TexKat

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 next last
To: dr_lew; nopardons; ladyinred
Semantic arguments are the refuge of a fool...substitute 'ANALYST' for 'Agent'. How about CIA EMPLOYEE...does that pass yr test? Why the hell are you pursuing this? Look Mister...I made my point as clear as I can. If you want to continue to add your paranoid rambling...do so...but don't bother me with your problems.

nopardons:
Sir...you truly have no idea regarding the luminosity of my bulb. And I sincerely would suggest that you includes factual support for anything you have to say.
And with that...re-read my posts.

Ladyinred:
Please re-read my posts. It really helps to do that before commenting.

21 posted on 11/13/2004 1:33:23 AM PST by Khurkris (That sound you hear coming from over the horizon...thats me laughing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Khurkris
Madame.......you not only have less than no idea about what you're talking about on this thread,but it really would be quite helpful,not to assign a sex to those you do not know here,and yes,I know you aren't a female;I called you madame for a reason.Go figure out what that reason is;if you can.

Words have set meanings.An agent is NOT the same thing as an analyst;though both are employees.And in not recognizing this,you prove that you are a dullard.

I read your posts and once was more than enough.Unlike you,I not only comprehend the written word,I also am more than capable of extrapolating on the ideas,thoughts,and facts conveyed therein. To whit...this man was a product of it's not what you know,but who you know,as well as also being totally in over his head at the CIA.Now,he is shilling a spurious book.

Have you ever read any of his columns? Have you read his book? If you have and still write the drivel you have done,then you are even less able to grasp the meaning,than I thought.If you haven't read any of his work and are posting this drivel,then you are only slightly less benighted;which isn't saying much of anything,since his stances have been posted to this thread and are in the article.

Your suggestion to me and ladyinread are unwarranted.OTOH,you really should take that advice to heart,for yourself.

22 posted on 11/13/2004 1:51:33 AM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Khurkris; dr_lew

Alas, my friend, you are at cross purposes which is certainly not to your discredit, because your adversary is speaking code.

The code is that no consideration for the survival of American democracy can be contemplated if it conflicts with their perceived notions of Israeli security.


23 posted on 11/13/2004 2:23:28 AM PST by nathanbedford (Attack, repeat, attack...Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

Gender-non-specific greeting...continue in your tirade if you wish. It bears no semblance to civil discussion. If you wish to flagellate over semantics it is your choice.


24 posted on 11/13/2004 2:35:13 AM PST by Khurkris (That sound you hear coming from over the horizon...thats me laughing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: TexKat

22 years. What does that mean in pension?


25 posted on 11/13/2004 2:37:38 AM PST by Glenn (The two keys to character: 1) Learn how to keep a secret. 2) ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Khurkris
His creds are legitamate.

I read about Imperial Hubris in The Atlantic Monthly, and figured I should browse it the next time I went to the bookstore. I didn't find something I could easily dismiss when I started reading it in the bookstore, so I bought and read the it.

While I don't agree with everything presented within, on the balance, Scheuer makes some damn painful points about the way we're going about our war on terror and the nature of our adversaries.

26 posted on 11/13/2004 5:01:50 AM PST by Hoplite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TexKat
Scheuer was chief of the CIA Counterterrorist Center's unit which focused on bin Laden from 1996 to 1999

Hmm... Damning himself I'd say... Not exactly something to brag about.

A whole lot of focusing going on 'round here. Yep, we're focusing, focusing, focusing...

27 posted on 11/13/2004 5:09:11 AM PST by csvset
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Imal

Maybe he has no business breathing. Possibly he was under the demo-commie hypnotic trance with the song, "Give Peace a Chance" seared in his minute liberal mind. It took shrillary/reno to raise that idiot.


28 posted on 11/13/2004 5:16:02 AM PST by No Surrender No Retreat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TexKat

Great progress! First, McLaughlin and now this guy. Porter Goss is kicking butt and may actually make the CIA into an effective spy agency. Let's get rid of all these leakers, backbiters, and snide "experts" and get some people with cajones in there.


29 posted on 11/13/2004 6:07:25 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Khurkris
No, you are missing the point. Just because someone is a "former" anything doesn't give him "creds."

You can be plugged into info and be totally wrong---look at some of Omar Bradley's decisions during WW II, or McClellan during the Civil War: he had Robert E. Lee's entire battle plan in front of him and analyzed it 100% WRONG.

Your ideology DRIVES how you interpret info. If you think that the "Joos" are behind everything, you will constantly draw the wrong conclusions. This is another turd that needs to be flushed from the CIA. The very fact that he can't keep secrets puts his "creds" in doubt.

30 posted on 11/13/2004 6:10:58 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Hoplite

Ok, specifically what?


31 posted on 11/13/2004 6:13:09 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: LS

This guy reminds me of all the other Clinton security chiefs like Richard Clarke.

If you read between the lines of what they are saying, it is that appeasement is the way to go. Fight back a little but mostly negotiate and give them a little of what they want. Then they will be satisfied and go away.

AND THAT WAS the policy that Clinton's administration followed and what followed from that was 9/11 and extreme Islamic extremism.


32 posted on 11/13/2004 6:14:18 AM PST by JustDoItAlways
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: TexKat

Can't the CIA shut him up? Can't they just classify everything he knows?


33 posted on 11/13/2004 6:14:58 AM PST by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexKat

bump


34 posted on 11/13/2004 6:17:00 AM PST by RippleFire ("It was just a scratch")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexKat

"Scheuer was chief of the CIA Counterterrorist Center's unit which focused on bin Laden from 1996 to 1999 and remained a CIA analyst after that."

In other words, after four years of incompetence, even the clintonoids couldn't stand him and he was demoted to a position where he couldn't do as much damage.


35 posted on 11/13/2004 6:17:05 AM PST by hinckley buzzard (I, the Jury)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Khurkris

"Scheuer's statement said senior leadership had allowed the intelligence officers working against al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden to be made scapegoats for pre-Sept. 11 failures.


Scheuer was chief of the CIA Counterterrorist Center's unit which focused on bin Laden from 1996 to 1999 and remained a CIA analyst after that."






"You don't have to like the guy, you can question his motives....but it makes sense to analyze what he's saying. His creds are legitamate."


Why no outcry over the Gorelick WALL???


36 posted on 11/13/2004 6:42:06 AM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TexKat
I just heard the mediots whining about this on radio news.

Mediots Whining = Goss is sweeping out the trash.

37 posted on 11/13/2004 10:08:23 AM PST by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Khurkris
His book said the United States was losing the war against terrorism and that sticking to current policies would only make its enemies in the Islamic world grow stronger.

What is his analysis of what we are doing wrong? That is the question. There are errors we are making, that is certain. But so far, the critics have not offered constructive suggestions that would improve the effort as opposed to harmfully undermining our war effort.

38 posted on 11/13/2004 10:12:20 AM PST by AmericanVictory (Should we be more like them, or they like us?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Khurkris
His book said the United States was losing the war against terrorism and that sticking to current policies would only make its enemies in the Islamic world grow stronger.

What is his analysis of what we are doing wrong? That is the question. There are errors we are making, that is certain. But so far, the critics have not offered constructive suggestions that would improve the effort as opposed to harmfully undermining our war effort.

39 posted on 11/13/2004 10:12:21 AM PST by AmericanVictory (Should we be more like them, or they like us?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: LS
Your comments are right on target. Analysis and interpretation are done from a standard base. It is the agenda, or sometimes the lack of agenda (utter confusion), that determines how the analysis and interpretation is done and how this moulded intel is used.
The distribution of this material is part of this predetermined agenda. Who it is sent to, when it is sent and how much of it is sent all plays into the game.

If Scheuer put out 100 pieces of analysis intel and 95 were complete BS, it is still wrong to automatically discount the other 5. Even 'dezinfomatzia' - disinformation can be critically analyzed and have its uses.

IMO, Scheuer knew his game was closing. He capitalized on it by writing some books. Nothing new or unusual about that. The list of 'former intelligence' people who have done this is long. From what I have read he made his higher-ups aware of his doings and his material was vetted and approved for printing. I imagine this will continue for a while.

And yes, I agree, better off with him out of the company and with the spotlight on him. His 15 minutes may last for a few years. He has contacts in an area of the world that is going to be very active for quite a few years to come.

We will probably hear more from Mr. Scheuer.
40 posted on 11/13/2004 7:02:25 PM PST by Khurkris (That sound you hear coming from over the horizon...thats me laughing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson