OBL & CIA

National Review ^ | 7-04-06 | James S. Robbins

[ikez78]

So CIA analysts concluded that Osama bin Laden wanted George Bush to win the 2004 election, and this is why he released a video tape just days before the election? If true, this is just more evidence that the spy agency needs a thorough cleaning.

[river rat]

It appears the Carter/Clinton Administrations succeeded in the final acts and appointments needed to convert the CIA into a shit magnet for leftists...

By now, it has probably reached the point of becoming unsalvageable...

Even in the mid 60's -- the "civilians in action" that operated in I Corps were certifiable assholes of the first order... Of the few I personally met or knew of -- NONE seemed to be playing with a full deck...

Our Gunny actually threatened OUT LOUD one of the jerks if he ever again returned to our position uninvited.....he never returned..

Semper Fi

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

In the CIA unit dedicated to finding bin Laden failure is not an option. It's standard equipment.

[jveritas]

No wonder why we have not capture Bin Laden so far, if there are a**holes in the CIA hate President Bush more than Bin Laden.

[Bedford Forrest]

The strong lines of synergy between the islamofascist ali babas and the quislings infesting the NY Slimes/MSM, etc, significantly validate their grim insanity, with ripple effects among many of our white-livered political elites. How else to explain our absolute refusal to punish severely the enablers and financial supporters of the islamofascists - in Iran, Syria and Saudi. Our leaders' verbal threats against all of the above [not to mention the North Korean headcase] sound more and more like those frequently uttered by Krinton.

[Bahbah]

I have to agree with Robbins on this one. Happy 4th, sl.

[Experiment 6-2-6]

What does Osama Bin Laden have to do with the Culinary Institute of America?

[oceanview]

and we still don't know the real story behind the hasty Goss exit.

[nathanbedford]

The intriguing question which had troubled me until recently was why in God's name would the left fail to support, indeed, even sabotage a war against Islamic fundamentalists whose every doctrinal breath is anathema to the left?

There is a parallel thread about Marxist taking over our school system, IN UNION WITH MARX (Pres. of NYC School Supv's is proud marxist)http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1660288/posts in which one sees it all beginning to come together and offer a bit of an explanation for this glaring paradox.

My view is that the left is behaving as its always did, that is, it is more concerned about winning its own war for dominance and will worry about an external enemy later. A glaring example of this selfishness is reflected in the life of Mao Tse-tung who callously sacrificed his own troops to gain the upper hand over other communists. He risked losing the whole of China to the Japanese rather than compromise his grab for power.

So I think the left is so arrogant, as arrogant as it ever was before the fall of communism, that it believes he can deal with the islamo fascists after it disposes of Western democracy as we know it.

[Reactionary]

"I think Osama assumed we would be like the Russians and get totally bogged down."

Either that, or he assumed the nitwit "liberals" in the media would spin American defeat no matter what happened on the ground.

[Waco]

The "spy" agency was created to SPY on US! Gotta think in reverse razamataz logicical omigosh.

[highlander_UW]

Given the Islamist mindset that they wish to bring about Armageddon (their version of it anyway), then it's possible that OBL might have wanted to Bush to win...but if he were simply looking for a respite and a chance to regain strength then he'd want the cut and run party to win...so I suppose the question is simply...is OBL rational? If he is, he wanted the dems to win, if he's not he wanted Bush to win.

[Marine_Uncle]

From the opening: "So CIA analysts concluded that Osama bin Laden wanted George Bush to win the 2004 election..."
According to who? Is it verifiable. As some have indicated in their responses in this post, the CIA folks are dopes, far left libs, fruitbats etc..
But somehow I don't think the whole agency is permeated with total meatheads. And realistically the CIA cannot be disbanded, anymore then say one might suggest the liberalized DOS should be.
One thing we all would most probably agree upon, is the CIA has for a long time slowly been taken over by the left, influx of liberal educated people. In order to revamp the institution in a new direction is not going to be easy to do. One cannot expect to just put in a director of a given political ideology and expect years of mindset to be transformed. Same goes with the State Department.
These agencies have over a period of time been transformed into a new animal. And quite frankly in the case of the DOS one can go back to pre WWII and see certain changes that had taken place, that pointed to a less sovereign oriented agency.
FDR and his cronies spawned the seeds for change in the whole US government. We continue to see the fruits born from seeds that where less patriotic then many realize.