Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bald Eagle who wrote (414380)	6/12/2003 9:19:11 AM
From: PROLIFE	Respond to of 769670

Democrats Admit Big Hard-Left Problem Gary Aldrich The other day I had the privilege of meeting with one of our country's leading patriotic Southern Democrats - quite possibly an endangered species. The reason for my visit was to ask him if he agreed with my conclusions that the Democratic Party has been hijacked by radical elements of the Hard-Left. What I learned should make every flag-waving American stand up and take notice. Instead of arguing with me, he agreed that the Democratic Party is being held hostage by various "groups" who are not shy about using their power to shift Democratic policy to the Left. He stated that one of his biggest disappointments when he came to Washington was to learn that Democratic Party leaders were ultra sensitive to the reactions of these groups. The Hard-Left interest groups include those you would recognize - the environmental zealots, the radical and oftentimes self-described lesbian feminists and their soul mates, the ever hysterical gay men with a political agenda, the unionized employee groups, and especially the federal-level employee unions now fighting President Bush's attempts to bring merit and excellence back to the federal agencies. Do President Bush and his administrators have a fetish about excellence and accountability? Are they perfectionists? I believe they are simply trying to protect this country by making sure dysfunctional and incompetent federal employees are weeded out. It is no secret that the federal government has become a massive "TVA" make-work project for the Democrats. It's no shock to learn that incompetent federal employees favor the Democrats because they believe the Democrats will protect them in return for their loyal vote and some level of financial political support. What's wrong with "threatening" federal employees by insisting that they work hard and produce a high-quality product? Why would any political party insist that we stick to old-fashioned civil service protections when our country's safety is on the line? What happened to the idea that the Democratic Party is the party of change and progress? The answer is obvious - the Democratic Party is being held hostage by the knee-cappers who run the employee unions. The Hard-Left groups would rather see more confusion and incompetence, I guess, than go along with anything George W. Bush would suggest. Isn't it a fact that unions have brought giant corporations to the brink of bankruptcy and beyond before they would ever agree to cave in to the hated capitalistic, greedy management? It's clear that the Hard-Left groups hate Bush and wish him ill. What makes anybody believe that employee unions will back off in the interest of fighting terrorism? Everyone knows the federal government is flooded with employees who ought to be disciplined and dismissed, but nothing is ever done about it. But when the Republicans try to make positive change, the Democrats gleefully monkey-wrench their efforts. This is because the Hard-Left controls those in congress who would otherwise do something to restore excellence to the federal government. In my new book, Thunder on the Left, I make the connection between the missteps in the FBI in recent years, and the typical Hard-Left policies, such as decades-long quota hiring, ridiculous PC personnel policies related to the punishment of poor performance, and accelerated promotions designed to "help" so-called favored employees. These disastrous, misguided policies might have pleased certain Hard-Left pressure groups, but the outcome has been low performance, corruptions, and massive morale problems. It's so obvious, but nobody's brave enough to talk about it. In all my years in the FBI, I never met a person in the favored groups who appreciated the stigma of having anything given to them as a result of their gender or ethnic roots. Those I met wanted to move ahead based on merit - as a result of their good works. The aggressive actions on the part of Congress - held hostage to the groups and certain attorneys general - have all but destroyed morale within the ranks of the FBI by making them pretend that every employee is the same. All are equal, but some are more equal - you understand? Now that our nation is at war, perhaps we can revisit the policies that have been shoved down our throats by the bullies from the Hard-Left who've been pushing us around and shouting us down for more than thirty years. Their flawed socialistic policies have done nothing but create a more dangerous world and massive resentment, but the changes wrought by the Hard-Left have always enhanced the power and influence of the Hard-Left. Hard-Left socialistic policies have come at a high price for our nation - and also for the Democratic Party - but today's dangerous world gives us an opportunity to renew the American dream by making sure every citizen has equal opportunity. We can no longer afford to continue to listen to the flawed pipe-dreams of the Hard-Left. They are poisoning our political system with their hateful rhetoric and disingenuous hysteria. On this, the 267th birthday of one of America's greatest truth-tellers, Patrick Henry, is it possible to enjoy some straight talk and some common sense? It would be healthy for the country, and it would be a nice change from the usual nonsense that has lately come out of the mouths of too many of our national leaders on both sides of the aisle. patrickhenrycenter.org

To: Bald Eagle who wrote (414380)	6/12/2003 9:30:59 AM
From: PROLIFE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

yourmailinglistprovider.com SENSE OF BETRAYAL AFTER 9/11 MORE LEAKS TO COME By Martin Dillon The latest leak of a memo from veteran FBI agent, Coleen Rowley, to the Bureau’s Director, Robert Mueller, is a sign of things to come. There is, not only in the FBI, but in America at large a sense of betrayal – a feeling that the truth about who knew what and when before 9/11 has been deliberately concealed. The feeling of betrayal is deepest among many rank and file agents in the FBI who know that catastrophe was waiting in the wings. “We are angry that our efforts were thwarted and that people in HQ have been trying to hide the facts and shift the blame to agents in the field,” a Special Agent in New York told Globe-Intel. There was a clear and present danger before 9/11. The master terrorist, Osama Bin Laden had been identified. Clues had not been followed. Wiretaps on crucial suspects were denied – both by FBI HQ and several senior judges. The blame game in some parts of the US media is to point the finger at the Bush Administration but that will only have the effect of narrowing the real search for the truth. George Bush inherited an intelligence community that had gone into decline during the two terms of his predecessor, Bill Clinton. The FBI had faced several congressional inquiries and the CIA had drifted into believing spy satellites, drones and high-tech listening posts throughout the world would protect the United States. At Langley, the CIA lacked the linguists to translate intercepts in most Middle East languages. It had more significantly failed to develop a critical HUMINT capacity - human intelligence gathering. There was no clear insight into the strategies being developed by major terror groupings round the globe. As Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service, has demonstrated, it takes years to target and recruit terrorists. Yet, it is the most effective way to build a profile of the enemy – from within – and learn first hand what is being planned. Instead, the CIA relied on intercepts of mobile phone messages. These meant very little in terms of hard intelligence. Terrorists had begun using the Internet to hide their traces. But very little attention was paid to that digital world. Meantime the FBI the rank and file had decidedly little respect for the Bureau’s hierarchy in Washington, convinced those in charge were more concerned about covering their backs than protecting and supporting agents on the ground. A year before his death in the 9/11 attack on the WTC, I asked John O’Neill, the former FBI Executive agent in New York, why he had not chosen to go to Washington to climb the career ladder. He had given me one of his wry smiles before replying. “The only action in Washington is inaction,” he said. John O’Neill, like others outside the capitol, knew that in FBI HQ everyone had to play the game – the political game. “I don’t want to be a part of that culture. In headquarters they spend their time covering their butts and watching what’s happening on Capitol Hill,” John O’Neill added. <font color=red>The culture he referred to was one that had its genesis in the Clinton years.</font> Then, relationships between the FBI and the White House had hit an all time low. Louis Freeh, then FBI , spent much of his time fighting a rearguard action. In the background were the failures at Waco and the mishandling of the Oklahoma bombing investigation. Added to the mix had been the FBI’s involvement in the Clinton impeachment scandal and calls for them to more thoroughly investigate not only the President but also the First Lady over Whitewater and other dubious ventures they had been involved in. Little time had been spent protecting the nation. As for sharing intelligence, it simply had no place within the culture John O’Neill had alluded to. The CIA and the FBI had a deep mistrust of each other. Both agencies had been heavily penetrated by spies. The discovery of the Russian spy, Robert Hansen, in the FBI a year before 9/11 had only served to deep the suspicion in Langley that the FBI was leaking like a sieve. There are many disgruntled FBI field agents now sitting on information that sooner or later will be made public and will open a window into the Clinton years It would have been too much for George Bush and his new Administration to realize the depth of the problems within the US intelligence community. It took the deaths of thousands on 9/11 to shed light on mess within the whole intelligence apparatus. It will not be fixed by if the hierarchy of the FBI remains intact because that is where, if John O’Neill was correct, the real malaise originated and permeated downwards. That point was made forcibly to Director Mueller is the latest leaked memo to him by veteran Special Agent, Coleen Rowley. “I shouldn’t be flippant but jokes were made that key FBI HQ personnel had to be spies or moles like Robert Hansen, who were so actually working for Osama Bin Laden to have so undercut our efforts,” Rowley wrote to Mueller. Her strongest criticisms of the FBI echoed what John O’Neill said the years before his death. “Our best real guess,” she told Muller - while speaking for other agents like herself – “Is that in most cases avoidance of all ‘unnecessary’ actions/ decisions by FBI HQ managers – and maybe to some extent field managers – has, in recent years, been seen as the safest FBI career course.” Rowley, an agent with 21 years experience and a legal counsel in the Bureau prior to 9/11 reminded Mueller of a “climate of fear within the FBI.” “Numerous high-ranking FBI officials who have made decisions or have taken actions, which, in hindsight, turned out to be mistaken or just turned out badly – have seen their careers plummet and end. This has in turn resulted in a climate of fear which has chilled aggressive FBI law enforcement actions/decisions,” Rowley had written in her private memo Director Mueller. While the spotlight has centered on the FBI for pre 9/11 intelligence failures, Globe-Intel has learned that the CIA has been strenuously engaged in preventing whist blowers from revealing the agencies failures in the same period. “The CIA Director, George Tenet, has warned staff to keep their mouths shut. The agency’s happy the spotlight is on us but, believe me that could change at any time. There are people within the agency who are just as disillusioned about the way the top guys in Langley impeded investigations,” an FBI source told Globe-Intel. Ends