|
The CIA’s war against President George W. Backrub
According to David Brooks, the CIA has been openly seeking to undermine, discredit, and defeat the Bush administration, an unprecedented circumstance which is further discussed at Powerline. It is to be wondered how much this insubordination by an executive department agency toward the head of the executive branch, which would be like a man’s arm rebelling against his head, was exacerbated or even created as a result of the amazing decision by George W. Backrub (that’s the U.S. president who gives his enemies a backrub, and then after they stab him in the back, he gives them another backrub) to leave in place the Clintonista George Tenet as Director of Central Intelligence, not only after January 20, 2001, but after September 11, 2001. Why did he do this? Well, we’re told the two Georges had good personal chemistry. We’re also told that President Backrub thought it was cool to have a tough-talking ethnic New Yorker in his Cabinet who could talk sports with him, you know, like when Tenet raised both arms above his head and told the president that Saddam Hussein’s possession of WMD stocks was a “slam-dunk.” Or maybe he just liked the fact that he and Tenet have the same first name. Whatever.
Oh, and according to Brooks, the CIA’s open insubordination against the president continues today, even after the departure of Tenet, and the president is still doing nothing about it. That’s Backrub for you. A man who shows Churchillian courage when it comes to waging wars for democracy on the other side of the world, yet who won’t defend the Constitution, laws, and borders of his own country. Comments
The CIA’s pissed at Bush because he pressured them to come up with info fingering Saddam. He and Cheney unloaded on any analyst who dared deviate from the script. So once the intel turned out to be false (no surprise there), Bush thanked the CIA by letting them take the fall for his dishonesty. Not exactly the best way to inspire employee loyalty. Posted by: Derek Copold on November 15, 2004 10:40 AMFrom what we know about El Presidente awareness of reality, I would be surprised if he was aware about CIA treachery Brooks describes. As a modern delegating manager GWB interacts with CIA only via Tenet. As long as Tenet is a loyal and personally compatible buddy, everything is ok. Repeated minor and semi-major failures don’t matter because the Prez is barely aware of them if at all. As SNL had Bush say in one of their skits that rings true for me:
Maybe it’s only my perception, but it seems that the CIA is infected with the same kind of pro-Arab, anti-Israel virus as the State Department. I drew this conclusion from “Imperial Hubris” by a former CIA bureaucrat. Posted by: Eugene Girin on November 15, 2004 4:48 PMO Lord, the old “Arabist” canard is being drug out again. Scheuer’s books are must-reads, and his analysis is dead-on correct. Unlike any “Arabist” I know, he directly attacks the PC supposition that Islam is a religion of peace, and he ridicules the idea of democratizing the Middle East. Apparently, Mr. Girin is a bit put out by Sheuer’s criticism of the Israeli lobby, which is also largely correct. Posted by: Derek Copold on November 15, 2004 5:22 PMMr. Copold, Sheuer’s criticism of Israel is not only inaccurate, but vile and ignorant. His books are “must-reads” only for the blame-America-first and it’s-all-Israel’s-fault crowd. Posted by: Eugene Girin on November 15, 2004 6:28 PM Considering the reaction it’s getting among the Let’s-deal-with-all-our-problems-by-sticking-our-heads -in-the-ground crowd, I’d say Scheuer’s on the right track. Posted by: Derek Copold on November 15, 2004 6:59 PM“Let’s-deal-with-all-our-problems-by-sticking-our-heads -in-the-ground crowd” ? Who do you mean by that Mr. Copold? Posted by: Eugene Girin on November 15, 2004 7:23 PMIt is now reported that two top CIA deputies are resigning, and their conflicts with Porter Goss and with the White House itself are the key. The New York Times article mentions the allegations that the CIA was leaking info and working against the Bush campaign. Perhaps someone who is registered online at the NYT can post a link to the story. Posted by: Clark Coleman on November 15, 2004 10:16 PM |