All the president's pikes

(Or the massacre at Langley VA)

from JoeUser Forums

If this article means what I think it means, there's going to be some metaphorical heads on pikes out in front of Langley in the near future.

 

To which I comment - if you're going to dabble in politics, be prepeared to play the price. The Civil Service isn't the right arena, anyway.

UPDATE: More on the bureaucratic fighting here
politics
4,947 views 6 replies
Reply #1 from PolMach Forums Top
So the people that wrote this article believe the CIA messed up just to make Bush look bad? Whatever. So now the administration is going to clean house and get all the back stabbers out. Did we just take a time machine 30 years back and have Nixon reelected?
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
No, that the CIA leaked classified data with the intent of making the administration look bad. Not that they didn't do a fine job of screwing up by the numbers, but then they turned around and acted in the political arena.

I don't think that Bush is another Nixon, anyway.
Curtains - Customize Windows with additional styles
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
IanTyger:

The CIA is an intelligence agency that should remain non-political in it's gathering and reporting of data to the appropriate leadership. "Removing" advisors and consultants within the agency with many years experience says that the situation within the government is becoming unhinged and the advisors have lost confidence in how their work is used.

Thus, we lose competence by the loss of the operatives over political issues. You are correct in asserting that it is necessary to have a CIA that has no voice outside of "the corridors of power" but you are incorrect if you assert that intelligence in this administration has been or will be used properly. The President does what he does by "gut instinct" not intelligence.

It's surprising, therefore, this hasn't happened before now.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top

disloyal to bush huh?  when did they start having to take oaths of loyalty to him rather than to us?