Bush plans on turning the CIA into the KGB

[Rich]

Another completely legitimate move by the fearless leader. Move along folks, nothing to worry about here.

CIA plans to purge its agency. Sources say White House has ordered new chief to eliminate officers who were disloyal to Bush

WASHINGTON -- The White House has ordered the new CIA director, Porter Goss, to purge the agency of officers believed to have been disloyal to President George W. Bush or of leaking damaging information to the media about the conduct of the Iraq war and the hunt for Osama bin Laden, according to knowledgeable sources.

"The agency is being purged on instructions from the White House," said a former senior CIA official who maintains close ties to both the agency and to the White House. "Goss was given instructions ... to get rid of those soft leakers and liberal Democrats. The CIA is looked on by the White House as a hotbed of liberals and people who have been obstructing the president's agenda."

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationwo...-top-headlines

I guess this is the start of the "political capital" Bush won by gaining 51% of the vote in a massively flawed election.

This is going to be hilarious. I can't wait to see what they sell you guys before invading Venezuela to remove Chavez, and how easy they tell you it will be. This is going to be even better than the time they had you believing Saddam Hussein was minutes away from nuking New York.

[Doctor Dre]

This is the end of democracy

[SuckOnThis]

Originally posted by Doctor Dre
This is the end of democracy

For a while. Things will turn around once we hit rock bottom.

[Argoz]

what a great world.....

We defeat Hitler for a free world and now....

[Rich]

Originally posted by SuckOnThis
For a while. Things will turn around once we hit rock bottom.

When we hit rock bottom, they'll be nothing but rocks left.

[webmaster x]

Originally posted by Doctor Dre
This is the end of democracy

it seems it is.

[Rich]

Originally posted by Pixhell
what a great world.....

We defeat Hitler for a free world and now....

Yep, the same family who financed him is taking a stranglehold on America.

Let's just watch more TV and hope things work themselves out.

[SuckOnThis]

Originally posted by Rich
When we hit rock bottom, they'll be nothing but rocks left.

I fear you're right and pray you're not.

[Rich]

I can't wait to hear what the morons are going to say about this. "There shouldn't be any people who disagree with the President in the intelligence community", and "The Associated Press is a commie rag, it's all lies" are about all I can think of. Hope I saved a couple of you some time.

[Rich]

Originally posted by SuckOnThis
I fear you're right and pray you're not.

So do I.

People have to wake up before we hit rock bottom.

[directfiesta]

Originally posted by Rich




[... I can't wait to see what they sell you guys before invading Venezuela to remove Chavez, and how easy they tell you it will be. [/B]

Offending the Global Dictator

Predictably, Venezuela's remarkable social transformation under Chavez has made him a target for "regime change" in Washington. As the enforcer of neoliberalism and elite control, the United States has overthrown many governments in Latin America and around the world for attempting to redistribute wealth. Through coups, invasions, assassinations, covert wars and economic coercion (in short, state terrorism), the USA has perpetrated the genocide of about half a million Latin Americans since 1950.

Particularly galling to the oil-driven Bush Administration has been Chavez's petroleum strategy, as well as his foreign policy. Venezuela is the second largest supplier of oil to the USA and a founding member of OPEC. Chavez has revitalized the oil cartel, sought closer relations with other oil producers such as Iran and Libya (considered enemies by the USA) and slashed Venezuelan oil output, causing prices to nearly double to more than $20 a barrel. He has also doubled the royalties charged foreign oil companies in Venezuela, including ExxonMobil, the biggest USA company. To finance his social spending, Chavez has moved to take control of the revenues of Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), the national oil company, which had been run for the exclusive benefit of its management and employees. The Venezuelan government depends on oil income for half of its budget, but only 20 percent of PDVSA's income went to the state, 80 percent being taken for "operating costs," another term for managerial corruption.




So, are you going to go liberate the poor Venezuelians ....

[Paul]

Originally posted by Rich
Let's just watch more TV and hope things work themselves out.

Well thats certainly what most Americians will be doing

These are worrying times

[Tala]

Jesus Christ.

1984 is closer than we might think.

[Rochard]

Stop your bitching. We lost, and Bush remains in office. Get over it.

The CIA works directly for the White House - and must support it's leader at all times. I don't always agree with my boss, but at the end of the day I do what I'm told - and I don't go behind his back leaking info. If I did that I would expect to fired too. Employees of the CIA do not dictate policy and have no right to attempt to sway public opinion.

[xenophobic]

It's a shame the hunting of these leaks are not motivated by the intelligence leaks that have damaged the hunt for Bin Laden, for example the person whom leaked information that the agency was intercepting calls made from/to Bin Ladens satellite phone -- which he stopped using once that was public. Also the leak that exposed a CIA agents identity?

[CoolE]

If it's true, if Bush is politicizing the front line of defense against terrorism, then that is sick. Man, did you guys elect the wrong fucking guy.

[Rich]

Originally posted by RocHard
Stop your bitching. We lost, and Bush remains in office. Get over it.

The CIA works directly for the White House - and must support it's leader at all times. I don't always agree with my boss, but at the end of the day I do what I'm told - and I don't go behind his back leaking info. If I did that I would expect to fired too. Employees of the CIA do not dictate policy and have no right to attempt to sway public opinion.

That's completely wrong, the intelligence community is not supposed to be partisan, ever. This has nothing to do with Bush winning the election. People are supposed to be able to produce information that says, ahem, Mr. President, it's entirely possible that Iraq does not have WMD. They're supposed to be around for decades protecting America, not getting switched around every time there's a White House change. You want a new CIA director every 4 years, and a completely new staff? "Sorry guys, I know you're close to catching Bin Laden, but the dems won this year, and you're all fired". Not everything works like Crossfire on CNN. This unprecedented action is the worst thing that could possibly happen in the fight against terrorists.

If information wasn't made public, 80% not 50% of Americans would still think Iraq had WMD.

[Rich]

Originally posted by xenophobic
It's a shame the hunting of these leaks are not motivated by the intelligence leaks that have damaged the hunt for Bin Laden, for example the person whom leaked information that the agency was intercepting calls made from/to Bin Ladens satellite phone -- which he stopped using once that was public. Also the leak that exposed a CIA agents identity?

That would involve actually protecting America, not helping the Bush administration personally. Do you really think that's going to happen?

[GatorB]

Originally posted by Rich
I can't wait to hear what the morons are going to say about this. "There shouldn't be any people who disagree with the President in the intelligence community", and "The Associated Press is a commie rag, it's all lies" are about all I can think of. Hope I saved a couple of you some time.

Well wasn't the whole probalem with WMDs was the fact Bush only wanted to hear facts that he agreed with? And thus the CIA complied? This move of course will help that situation.

A "leader" that always thinks he's right and refuses to hear the opinions of those that disagree with him is an IDIOT. PERIOD.

Let name some of these guys

Hitler, Stalin, Castro, Saddam. How's those empires doing now?

[directfiesta]

Originally posted by Rich

If information wasn't made public, 80% not 50% of Americans would still think Iraq had WMD.

What do you mean ???? Sure they have WMD, or had , or were capable of, or tought of or had a wet dream of ...

Here in South Dakota, we are patriots: we never question our President commander in chief and his " capital " ...

You are a terrorist !!! Why do you hate America so much ????

[Rich]

Originally posted by directfiesta
[B]Offending the Global Dictator

Predictably, Venezuela's remarkable social transformation under Chavez has made him a target for "regime change" in Washington. As the enforcer of neoliberalism and elite control, the United States has overthrown many governments in Latin America and around the world for attempting to redistribute wealth. Through coups, invasions, assassinations, covert wars and economic coercion (in short, state terrorism), the USA has perpetrated the genocide of about half a million Latin Americans since 1950.

Particularly galling to the oil-driven Bush Administration has been Chavez's petroleum strategy, as well as his foreign policy. Venezuela is the second largest supplier of oil to the USA and a founding member of OPEC. Chavez has revitalized the oil cartel, sought closer relations with other oil producers such as Iran and Libya (considered enemies by the USA) and slashed Venezuelan oil output, causing prices to nearly double to more than $20 a barrel. He has also doubled the royalties charged foreign oil companies in Venezuela, including ExxonMobil, the biggest USA company. To finance his social spending, Chavez has moved to take control of the revenues of Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), the national oil company, which had been run for the exclusive benefit of its management and employees. The Venezuelan government depends on oil income for half of its budget, but only 20 percent of PDVSA's income went to the state, 80 percent being taken for "operating costs," another term for managerial corruption.




So, are you going to go liberate the poor Venezuelians ....

I know it wasn't reported much in the US after it went bad, but in April 2002 the CIA organized a coup against democratically elected Hugo Chavez. As that article says, he nationalized the oil industry, and he also spoke out against Bush's "war on terror". He said they were "fighting terror with terror". Pedro Carmona was brought to the White House in February 2002, and Washington amazingly gave it's official support to the coup after one day. A democratically elected official overthrown by a military coup, and Bush supported it. The coup lasted two days, the US didn't anticipate the popularity of Chavez, and an uprising brought him back to power. He's now threatening to cut of oil to the US, and he's promising a 100 year war if the US invades.

They didn't make the same mistake in Haiti, when they decided democratically elected and hugely popular Jean Baptist Arastide, American actually had the nuts to send troops to help the coup and call it peacekeeping, Canada and France help them. They made sure to escort him to the other side of the world so the people couldn't put him back into power like they did with Chavez.

The funniest thing is, the Americans who tell people from other countries that US politics is none of their business. They don't understand how comedically ironic they're being. Of course not one of them even has any idea who Huge Chavez is.

[Melody]

Well thats certainly what most Americians will be doing

Bullshit...that's an ethnic stereotype. Are most Irishmen welfare cases that live in pubs?

Half of the Americans despise this man and want to see him driven from office...not that we have any chance of doing that so long as the Bush Regime is in power.

Oh, and meanwhile, Bush is honoring "WWII German POWs"...aka "Nazis".
As much sympathy as I feel for the German people, I definitely don't like the idea of the Shrub honoring Nazi soldiers...it is far too symbolic.

[Rich]

Originally posted by GatorB
Well wasn't the whole probalem with WMDs was the fact Bush only wanted to hear facts that he agreed with? And thus the CIA complied? This move of course will help that situation.

A "leader" that always thinks he's right and refuses to hear the opinions of those that disagree with him is an IDIOT. PERIOD.

Let name some of these guys

Hitler, Stalin, Castro, Saddam. How's those empires doing now?

Well Castro is doing pretty fucking good, all things considering. I don't think he falls in that category though. The rest of your post is bang on.

Bush and his neo-cons are ideologues, pure and simple. There's no reason for them to learn anything new, because they already know everything. They just want people to tell them what they want to hear, so they can justify what they already know they're going to do. A good leader makes decisions, ideologues do not make good leaders. Ever.

[CET]

Originally posted by RocHard
Stop your bitching. We lost, and Bush remains in office. Get over it.

The CIA works directly for the White House - and must support it's leader at all times. I don't always agree with my boss, but at the end of the day I do what I'm told - and I don't go behind his back leaking info. If I did that I would expect to fired too. Employees of the CIA do not dictate policy and have no right to attempt to sway public opinion.

Loyalty to leadership is asking for sheep. An intelligence agency should concern itself with uncovering truth, not loyalties. They should not support their leader if their leader is corrupt and immoral (hyphthetically speaking).

[theking]

Originally posted by Rich
That's completely wrong, the intelligence community is not supposed to be partisan, ever. This has nothing to do with Bush winning the election. People are supposed to be able to produce information that says, ahem, Mr. President, it's entirely possible that Iraq does not have WMD. They're supposed to be around for decades protecting America, not getting switched around every time there's a White House change. You want a new CIA director every 4 years, and a completely new staff? "Sorry guys, I know you're close to catching Bin Laden, but the dems won this year, and you're all fired". Not everything works like Crossfire on CNN. This unprecedented action is the worst thing that could possibly happen in the fight against terrorists.

If information wasn't made public, 80% not 50% of Americans would still think Iraq had WMD.

Wrong...as is SOP for you Richy boy. The CIA works for the administration in power and are required not to subvert administration policy from within or leak information... in an attempt to influence public opinion...to subvert administration policy from without. For the latter agents can not only be fired...they can also be criminally prosecuted.

[Rich]

Originally posted by Melody
Bullshit...that's an ethnic stereotype. Are most Irishmen welfare cases that live in pubs?

Half of the Americans despise this man and want to see him driven from office...not that we have any chance of doing that so long as the Bush Regime is in power.

Oh, and meanwhile, Bush is honoring "WWII German POWs"...aka "Nazis".
As much sympathy as I feel for the German people, I definitely don't like the idea of the Shrub honoring Nazi soldiers...it is far too symbolic.

No, half the people who voted want to see him gone. Something like 40% didn't vote. People who don't care are as bad or worse than people who care but are just led horribly astray.

[CET]

Originally posted by Rich
Well Castro is doing pretty fucking good, all things considering. I don't think he falls in that category though. The rest of your post is bang on.

Castro has dissenters shot. I think he does fall into the category of "ruthless dictators".

[Tala]

Originally posted by CET
Castro has dissenters shot. I think he does fall into the category of "ruthless dictators".

Technicalities.

[directfiesta]

Originally posted by Rich
but in April 2002 the CIA organized a coup against democratically elected Hugo Chavez. ndustry, and he also spoke out against Bush's "war on terror". He said they A that article says, he nationalized theoil

Movie was done on it: great documentary that happened just like that ... BTW, I did see it ... so I can comment, ....

The Revolution Will Not be Televised

In 2001, Kim Bartley and Donnacha O?Briain traveled to Venezuela to videotape a behind-the-scenes profile of President Hugo Chavez, the democratically elected leftist president who had been swept into office by a groundswell of support from the poor sections of Venezuela?s cities and countryside. While filming in April of 2002, they found themselves in the midst of a coup attempt against Chavez, and their cameras were there to capture those incredible moments of April 2002. They compiled this footage to create the documentary ?The Revolution will not be Televised.? Bartley and O?Briain were interviewed by Brian Forrest in October of 2003.

BF: At what point did you realize you were no longer making a portrait of Chavez but rather documenting a coup?
KB & DOB: The nature of the documentary changed quite dramatically, what set out to be a profile of Chavez and a look at what was going on in Venezuela turned into the story of a coup from the inside. Clearly on the night of the coup we realized that we were witnessing something quite extraordinary but we were reluctant to make any drastic decisions about the documentary. The decisions that were made were largely made in the edit and it was a slow and difficult process since we'd spent months prior to the coup filming with something quite specific in mind and we were reluctant to let that all go. In the end we tried, within the time constraints, to present as best we could the situation in Venezuela as we'd experienced it before moving the story along into the events surrounding the coup.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/08/296442.html

Torrent file available

[CET]

Originally posted by theking
Wrong...as is SOP for you Richy boy. The CIA works for the administration in power and are required not to subvert administration policy from within or leak information... in an attempt to influence public opinion...to subvert administration policy from without. For the latter agents can not only be fired...they can also be criminally prosecuted.

The CIA works under the president, but they work for the American people and that is where their loyalties are supposed to be.

[Rich]

Originally posted by CET
Castro has dissenters shot. I think he does fall into the category of "ruthless dictators".

That's greatly exaggerated, are you inside the USA? Almost all the information you've been given about Cuba for the past 50 years has been propaganda. I don't know if anyone's told you that yet. He executed people for attempting to plot coups during the cold war, what dictator hasn't? Give the guy a break, he's had the USA trying to remove him almost the entire time.

[theking]

Originally posted by CET
The CIA works under the president, but they work for the American people and that is where their loyalties are supposed to be.

They can be as loyal to the American people as they choose to be (provided they are willing to pay the consequenes)...but by law they cannot attempt to subvert Administration Policy from within and are subject to being dismissed from the CIA if they do so. If they leak information to the public in an attempt to subvert Administration Policy from without...they are not only subject to dismissal...but also criminal prosecution. In addition...even if they have been dismissed...they are still subject to criminal prosecution...if they leak information.

[Rich]

Originally posted by directfiesta
Movie was done on it: great documentary that happened just like that ... BTW, I did see it ... so I can comment, ....

Holy shit I've never seent that, thanks a ton bro. That's crazy, I can't wait to watch it.

[Doctor Dre]

Originally posted by Rich
When we hit rock bottom, they'll be nothing but rocks left.

[CET]

Originally posted by Rich
That's greatly exaggerated, are you inside the USA? Almost all the information you've been given about Cuba for the past 50 years has been propaganda. I don't know if anyone's told you that yet. He executed people for attempting to plot coups during the cold war, what dictator hasn't? Give the guy a break, he's had the USA trying to remove him almost the entire time.

Then why are people risking their lives to leave the country in little boats and rafts?

[Rich]

Originally posted by CET
Then why are people risking their lives to leave the country in little boats and rafts?

Because they're starving to death. Never been to Cuba huh?

[directfiesta]

Originally posted by Rich
Because they're starving to death. Never been to Cuba huh?

That's more like Haiti

People for all over the third world wants to better their situation. They go were they can go and/or are accepted.

USA has displayed open arms to Cuba's " freedom fighters " ....

[CET]

Originally posted by Rich
Because they're starving to death. Never been to Cuba huh?

Never been, but I'd like to go to see what it's like. Unfortunately, I'm not allowed to go because I'm an American citizen.

[project_naughty]

Originally posted by RocHard
Stop your bitching. We lost, and Bush remains in office. Get over it.

The CIA works directly for the White House - and must support it's leader at all times. I don't always agree with my boss, but at the end of the day I do what I'm told - and I don't go behind his back leaking info. If I did that I would expect to fired too. Employees of the CIA do not dictate policy and have no right to attempt to sway public opinion.

A voice of sanity in a thread full of barking m00nbats.

[Rich]

Originally posted by CET
Never been, but I'd like to go to see what it's like. Unfortunately, I'm not allowed to go because I'm an American citizen.

Lots of Americans fly there from Canada, they don't stamp your passport. Just pay for everything in cash.

[project_naughty]

Originally posted by theking
They can be as loyal to the American people as they choose to be (provided they are willing to pay the consequenes)...but by law they cannot attempt to subvert Administration Policy from within and are subject to being dismissed from the CIA if they do so. If they leak information to the public in an attempt to subvert Administration Policy from without...they are not only subject to dismissal...but also criminal prosecution. In addition...even if they have been dismissed...they are still subject to criminal prosecution...if they leak information.

Another sane person.

[Rich]

Originally posted by project_naughty
Another sane person.

lmfao, you know you're in big trouble when you're calling Pathfinder sane.

[CET]

Originally posted by project_naughty
Another sane person.

I don't disagree that those who abuse their position and break the rules need to be fired, but that's not what's going on. What's going on is a round of firings based on political sway, not job performance.

[sacX]

Originally posted by theking
They can be as loyal to the American people as they choose to be (provided they are willing to pay the consequenes)...but by law they cannot attempt to subvert Administration Policy from within and are subject to being dismissed from the CIA if they do so. If they leak information to the public in an attempt to subvert Administration Policy from without...they are not only subject to dismissal...but also criminal prosecution. In addition...even if they have been dismissed...they are still subject to criminal prosecution...if they leak information.

If there's no wall between the administration and the intelligence agency, then it's not an intelligence agency, it's a propaganda department.

[theking]

Originally posted by CET
I don't disagree that those who abuse their position and break the rules need to be fired, but that's not what's going on. What's going on is a round of firings based on political sway, not job performance.

That of course is exactly what would not be going on. A purging would apply only to those that...based upon their individual political sway...attempted to subvert Administration Policy. If you think that they are going to fire all of those of another polictical party...you are just foolish.

[the indigo]

Originally posted by RocHard
Stop your bitching. We lost, and Bush remains in office. Get over it.

The CIA works directly for the White House - and must support it's leader at all times. I don't always agree with my boss, but at the end of the day I do what I'm told - and I don't go behind his back leaking info. If I did that I would expect to fired too. Employees of the CIA do not dictate policy and have no right to attempt to sway public opinion.

You truly are a sheep. That's scary.

[Rich]

Originally posted by sacX
If there's no wall between the administration and the intelligence agency, then it's not an intelligence agency, it's a propaganda department.

Exactly. They already have enough of those.

[CoolE]

Originally posted by theking
That of course is exactly what would not be going on. A purging would apply only to those that...based upon their individual political sway...attempted to subvert Administration Policy. If you think that they are going to fire all of those of another polictical party...you are just foolish.

You didn't read the article.

"Goss was given instructions ... to get rid of those soft leakers and liberal Democrats. The CIA is looked on by the White House as a hotbed of liberals and people who have been obstructing the president's agenda."

[Rich]

Originally posted by CoolE
You didn't read the article.

Don't waste your time.

[theking]

Originally posted by sacX
If there's no wall between the administration and the intelligence agency, then it's not an intelligence agency, it's a propaganda department.

There is a wall. CIA emloyees are protected by Civil Service employee regs...within the confines of the various oaths/contracts they signed...upon employment by the Agency. They cannot be fired...willy nilly.