How to fix the intelligence community.... NOT!

Porter Goss was confirmed as the new CIA chief back in August. At the time (msnbc.msn.com/id/6063648/ - add your www), Goss promised to avoid partisanship, and Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, (R-Kan.), "rejected suggestions that Goss is too political" for the job. It is therefore no surprise whatsoever that Goss last week started moving to purge (commondreams.org/headlines04/1114-01.htm - add your www ) the CIA of liberals and replace them with inexperienced Bush loyalists. A former senior CIA official said, "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." But - bear with me, this is pretty funny - remember when we invaded Iraq because George W. Bush told us that Saddam Hussein had massive stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction? (Rack your brains, it wasn't very long ago). Well, all of that WMD information came from Bush loyalists within the intelligence services who were determined to give the president the justifications he needed to go to war, regardless of the facts. In fact, the White House even set up an Office of Special Plans (guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,999737,00.html- add your www) which would second-guess the CIA and give Bush the information he needed. So now - and this is the really hilarious part, you'll love this - now it's turned out that all the information Bush's intelligence cronies passed on to him was completely and utterly wrong, Goss is dumping the people who got it right. And the people who ****** up the pre-war intelligence so very royally? They get to keep their jobs. In fact, Goss is going to hire more of them. Brilliant! (This came from democraticunderground.com) Don't you feel safer already?

No Surrender, If you're going to keep spewing your anti-bush nonsense, at least do it without using obscenities, ok? This is expected to be a CLEAN website, and some of us on here still have morals.. -Mike

Well, she was just using the words Dick Cheney used towards Sen. Pat Leahy...

Kathy, don't confuse him. Everyone knows that cussing is only immoral when a liberal does it. When a conservative does it, it's justified.

Not if you voted for Bush you don't have any morals.... by the way, the words were a direct quote. You know, like this one, by GWB, talking about Osama Bin Laden... "Ah, y'know, again, I don't know where he is. I, uh, heh heh, ah, I... I... I repeat what I said, I truly am not that concerned about him."

Thanks for the laugh!!!!!! The democratic underground?!?!?!?!?! Now theres an objective, reliable source!!!!! This is from the people who think Nov 4, 2004 was a worse day for the U.S. than 9-11!!!!! Why don't you see what the National Enquirer is reporting? I think there are aliens attacking!!! ROFL!!!!!!!! Lisa Huffstetler

You did check the links right? The links are from sound, non-biased journalism sources. But given that you're probably a Fox News fan, you probably wouldn't recognize a non-biased source if it bit your nose off.

The next to the last line says democraticunderground.com Of course, I'd deny I used that site myslef so I don't really blame you!

In the text of the message there are links to the sites that democratic underground used for it's information. I don't deny using democratic underground. What I posted was their material, but in the text of what I posted where links to MSNBC, The Guardian, and Common Dreams, which is where they got their information.

Anybody else notice that the two "rebuttals" to this post didn't spend one second debating the issues raised by MSNBC, Common Dreams or The Guardian, but instead attacked the commentary by Democratic Underground and the cuss words in the commentary. Classic conservative debate tactic.... ignore the issue and attack the person or persons bringing up the issue, or attack the language used. No one has anything to say about the CIA firing the folks who got it RIGHT in Iraq an hiring more people to blindly support the pre-ordained conclusions of the Bush Administration? My guess is they have nothing of any value to add to the discussion.