WASHINGTON -- The White House has ordered the new CIA director, Porter Goss, to purge the agency of officers believed to have been disloyal to President George W. Bush or of leaking damaging information to the media about the conduct of the Iraq war and the hunt for Osama bin Laden, according to knowledgeable sources. "The agency is being purged on instructions from the White House," said a former senior CIA official who maintains close ties to both the agency and to the White House. "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."

 

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/na...y-top-headlines

How convenient that the purge seems to be happening on party lines.

 

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."

 

 

Yeah...9/11.

How convenient that the purge seems to be happening on party lines.

 

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."

 

 

Yeah...9/11.

615043[/snapback]

 

Are you saying the CIA should promote the activity of leakers? To paraphrase Jonnie C. - if you leak the s***, someones gonna throw a fit.

 

BTW - Clinton took out the trash in the Intel Directorate back in 94'

 

http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/ind...rs&code=94-D_74

615073[/snapback]

 

Who are the leakers? Do you know? So just assume its all liberals and throw the baby out with the bathwater. Right..sounds more like an excuse. Dont follow the sovereign? You will be punished comrade.

Since you refused to answer the question, I question your stance towards leakers.

 

Yeah, thats it. I support leakers. Youve got problems tonyi.

Everyone would prefer matters to be taken care of internally, but hey sometimes it takes a leak to stir the sh*t up.

I havn't heard tonyi condemn the Bush Admin leak of that CIA operative's identity, so therefore he must fully support leaks when they benefit his side.

I havn't heard tonyi condemn the Bush Admin leak of that CIA operative's identity, so therefore he must fully support leaks when they benefit his side.

615624[/snapback]

I was really appalled by that whole incident. It was a clear act of vengeance by the Bush administration, but so far no one has been punished. Early on, people believed that Karl Rove was to blame for the leak.

Given the intel failures, a purge seems in order no matter what the reason.

 

 

Wouldn't that have to involve Bush firing himself, since he was one of the main causes for the "intel failures"?

 

 

Too many cold war era dinosaurs at the top who can't adapt to the new threats.

 

 

And who put a bunch of cold warriors (like Rumsfeld) in charge when he came into office?

I havn't heard tonyi condemn the Bush Admin leak of that CIA operative's identity, so therefore he must fully support leaks when they benefit his side.

615624[/snapback]

 

You're lying - go back and check the record. I explicitly stated in the past that the leakers should be hunted down.

615683[/snapback]

So shouldnt you be bothered that the leakers in the CIA are hunted down but somehow Bush hasnt found the leaker in the White House? You made it clear and obvious:

 

Leakers aren't hard to find. Compartmentalization and the nature of the leaked info identifies them.

 

 

So why has it been so difficult for the Bush White House to find the Plume leaker? Didnt Bush promise an investigation to discover this person? Could it be that Bush and company are intentionally protected a treasonous dog? Or maybe because that treasonous dog is a yes man lackey, they wont turn him in. I await a response.