Posted on 05/30/2002 8:36:48 PM PDT by tgslTakoma
I guess. I’d say they’re under semi-direct control, but I understand what you mean.
The local agents aren't the only problem.
The leadership is corrupt.
The FBI is a Federal Bureaucracy. They exist to exist, and thrive. Furthermore, they are a highly politicized Federal Bureaucracy, which means that they must satisfy the politics/politicians of the day to survive and thrive… which is their goal, IMO.
I think of them as a baby. They eat and poop and cry and grow. That’s what they do. It is silly to complain about their eating, pooping, crying, and growing because that is simply ALL they can do. That is their purpose. That is the nature of the entity you are dealing with.
I get frustrated with them too. If you want to cancel/decrease the regular feedings, which would supposedly decrease the pooping, and stop the growing, I might be in agreement - understanding that the crying will probably get exponentially louder. OTOH, if you just want to criticize someone because the infant is crying… I don’t know what to say. That’s what it does. As long as you feed it, it will grow and cry for more food and on and on… you know.
Bush didn't fire even one man..
The President didn't do his job.
Well, there is that little detail… hopefully somebody sees some reason to keep the "kid" around. I don't at this point, but nobody asked me...
That will get my enimies all upset!
On to Valley Forge!
Exactly what was the problem Bush had plenty of time to fix?********************
# 27 by swheats
Bush had plenty of time to remove corrupt FBI men.
Bush had plenty of time to remove corrupt ATF men.
Bush had plenty of time to make our airlines secure.
Bush had plenty of time to remove the Islamic terrorists who were in our country.
You probably could share blame back to Lincoln, but would it be accurate?********************
# 27 by swheats
Yes.
Being fitted for a darling blue evening gown with matching heels and bag.
The FBI suffers from the same thing alot of bureaucracies do...Micromanaging. I've seen it in my own state agency. The people at the top don't trust the guy at the bottom to do his job and continually second-guess, and stifle any productivity/creativity.********************
# 28 by mass55th
That's not acceptable to me, even if it's true.
There is no excuse for highly trained men to fight each other instead of working together. There's no excuse for any President to allow infighting in such a critical area.
One question for you?
True or false !
It was against the law for the FBI to spy on anyone in the USA pre-9-11-01 without proof of a crime and a court order?
If you answer this correctly your comments above will seem ignorant of the facts !
True or false !********************
It was against the law for the FBI to spy on anyone in the USA
pre-9-11-01 without proof of a crime and a court order?
# 36 by america-rules
The rules change so often that I wouldn't swear either way.
However, even if the law says that the FBI can spy on a citizen without a court order, it's still illegal.
At what point do you think he created a to-do list of "heads that would roll" once he was in office? The Dems in our Congress has done everything in their power to keep Bush off balance and disoriented. Thank God their strategy has rebounded back to them.
Once again you are captive to post Church Commission dogma. There is nothing at all to prevent the FBI, CIA OR any national security apparatus from "spying". That is their job. Just as the pre-Church FBI had Carte' Blanche to infiltrate and "spy" on communist organizations and fronts, the FBI is justified to do that with terrorist organizations and fronts. The FBI was never conceived to be a law enforcement agency in the first place. Its original mission was to PREVENT assaults on national security. Muller re-organization announcement has placed the FBI back into that mission.
"...At what point do you think he created a to-do list of "heads that would roll" once he was in office? The Dems in our Congress has done everything in their power to keep Bush off balance and disoriented. Thank God their strategy has rebounded back to them.********************
# 38 by swheats
No matter what the Democrats "did" to Bush, the President has a job to do. Out of all the scary details the new President had to deal with, the security of the nation is the most urgent.
Everyone here on these threads knew that Clinton had destroyed our security infrastructure. I've talked with others about the dangers the Islamic terrorists posed to us. Do you think Bush wasn't as well informed as we were?
Fine, Bush had thousands of little details to resolve to consolidate his chances for re-election. I already said that Bush was playing politics instead of doing his job.
I'm just an ordinary citizen, though better informed than most due to my interest in the workings of my country. I wouldn't have waited until after the election to decide what I was going to do, and I don't have a staff to research the issues like Bush has.
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.