Sunday, April 23, 2006

McCarthy: Second Day - First Thoughts

Varifrank asks some very good questions

  1. Maybe the war would be over by now if half the CIA wasnt more interested in "getting Bush" than it is with "getting Osama".
  2. The WAPO and the New York Times are saying that McCarthys efforts are not just legitimate, but actually required for the safe running of a government. Would they say the same if other members of the CIA were to reveal classified information on the failures of the Clinton Administration?
    Of course not. The MSM believes it knows what is best for the country.
  3. In my mind, the CIA is a compromised organization. Mary McCarthy is not some back bench disgruntled civil servant, she's a major player in the Security Community, the NSC and the CIA. Organizations tend to take on the attributes of those at the top. People who are promoted within the organization are promoted because they mimic those in the leadership. This means that there are a large number of people in the CIA whos careers map, personal network and decision making processes mimic those of Dr. McCarthy. Those that are supporting McCarthy now need to explain how an out of control, and apparently disloyal CIA has helped secure the United States against the people who are trying to kill us.
  4. How many "dots" are not being "connected" because half of the CIA is sitting in its cubicles frothing at the mouth in hatred over the words "President Bush". How many people have died due to someone elses Bush Derangement Syndrome?
  5. At what point does the actions of someone like McCarthy stop being a "Leak" and start being a form of "shadow government"?
    Some time prior to sending the husband of an agent to research something he was unqualified to do, and then report what he found in an editorial in the paper, in an attempt to influence an election.
  6. Its supposed to be the "Central Intelligence Agency", not the "Central Policy Agency". We didnt elect you Dr. McCarthy, you are not "the decider"; its not your call.
  7. If a person will violate their security oath for political revenge, what wont they do?
  8. What strikes me as most interesting about this case is that it appears that Dr. McCarthy has close working relationships with many people in the "anti-Bush" community and the Democrat party. Is this just a leak, or part of an attempt at a soft "coup"?
  9. Why is Dr. McCarthy so interested in overturning the results of an legitimate election? Should we trust someone who doesnt trust the voters? ( I love replaying Clinton Apologies for my own benefit)
  10. Now that we have reason to question the loyalty of Dr. McCarthy and that she served in the NSC with Sandy Berger, Just what was it that Sandy Berger was carrying in his pants out of the archive? Is it related to this?

No comments: