23 year CIA veteran says he was fired for not lying about WMDs (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 11:08:31 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Campaign
  23 year CIA veteran says he was fired for not lying about WMDs (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: 23 year CIA veteran says he was fired for not lying about WMDs  (Read 9621 times)
Wakie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,767


« on: December 10, 2004, 05:21:22 AM »

Under Clinton the CIA was larded with left-wing hate America types.

Its time to clean out that nest.

Blaming it on your boogeyman Clinton?  Come on pal do some math.  The guy is a 23-year CIA veteran.  He was sacked in 2004.  This means he was hired in 1981.  Who was President that year?  Oh yeah ... so I guess the real blame for this rests with Ronald Reagan.
Logged
Wakie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,767


« Reply #1 on: December 10, 2004, 05:38:41 AM »

Where are the WMD, wise-guy?

Thanks to Bush, military recruitment is 60,000 people short.

Go sign up, now.


Check out the 500 tons of uranium at the Tuwaitha nuclear facility.  Read a newspaper once in while, okay?

Umm ... 500 tons of natural uranium at a nuclear power plant facility isn't WMD's.  In fact back in early 2003, when this story hit the papers Republicans jumped up and yelled "there it is", only to have egg on their faces when the IAEA said they were aware of the site, had monitored it, and that while the material is radioactive and therefore could be used in a dirty bomb it wasn't suitable for creating a 'Nuke'.

Now I'm not a WMD expert, but David Kay is and his report to Congress in 10/03 (7 months after the Tuwaitha story broke) stated that although Saddam would have liked to have had WMD's he did not possess any and had no serious chance of possessing any in a short period of time.
Logged
Wakie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,767


« Reply #2 on: December 10, 2004, 01:13:28 PM »

Let's see, fired in August, been there 23 years.  Is that 23 years one month or 23 years 9 months.  He could have been a late Carter appointee.

Furthermore the people who do the hiring are entrenched bureaucrats of who knows what political bent.

Does that answer you Wakie & BRTD?

You make an excellent point.  Odds are who is President is irrelevant!  In fact I tend to believe it is totally irrelevant.  Mr Hayden implied that this was "Clinton's fault".

1) This guy may have a valid complaint.  We don't know all the details.

2) As you have pointed out, the people who do the hiring at the CIA are entrenched bureaucrats and probably very thinly linked to any one politician.

3) I pointed out that the man joined the CIA in 1981, at the beginning of the Reagan administration.  So if you do want to 'blame' this on a President you should blame it on Reagan.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.024 seconds with 14 queries.