SavannahMann
Platinum Member
- Nov 16, 2016
- 13,860
- 6,485
- 365
The CIA is purportedly reached the conclusion that the Russians were behind the hacking of the DNC and Podesta emails. This leaves me less certain than more certain. Perhaps if the CIA had a track record of being right when important decisions were before us, but sadly they don't.
The CIA are the ones who told us that they were absolutely certain that a factory was being used to create Chemical Weapons. President Bill Clinton ordered it bombed, and we were roundly chastised in the Worlds Press for bombing an Asperin factory.
Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory - Wikipedia
We were certain thanks to the CIA, and we were wrong, again thanks to the CIA. Iraqi WMD's, assessments of groups that were actually Terrorists that the CIA said were moderate. It's not a question of what the CIA got wrong, it's more along the lines of what they ever got right?
The CIA has a long history of missing things, or getting them wrong. The CIA somehow missed the massing of troops in North Korea before the invasion of the South in 1950. The CIA was wrong about China coming into that same war. Oh they'll never do it.
The CIA got quite a bit wrong, screwed up quite a bit, but that's not all. The Walker Spy Ring was able to work right under their noses for decades. Despite overwhelming evidence that someone was tipping the Soviet's off, nobody in the CIA thought to question Aldrich Ames, one of the few people with access to all the information that had leaked to the Soviets.
It goes on, and on, and on. CIA screw up after CIA mistake. Now, with this record in mind, we turn to the claim that the CIA is certain that the Russians were involved in the hacking of the DNC and Podesta emails. OK, first let's go back a bit. Wasn't it the FBI, State, and CIA departments that told us they were certain that nobody hacked Hillary's email server?
How certain are they, more or less certain than they were that the Asperin factory was making VX gas? Are you more certain, or less that Iraq had WMD's?
That's what so funny to me. People who would be swearing that the CIA is making it up if the President was W are the same ones who are stomping their foot now and screaming that the CIA are certain and why isn't that good enough for you?
Yes Obama is President. Yes, Obama's appointed Director is in charge. The problem is that the drones in the basement who are the ones putting together the reports are the same drones who were in the basement when the Boston Bombers were identified by Russian Intelligence and who were unable to overcome a "typo" to identify them before dozens were killed and wounded.
Telling me the CIA is certain is sort of like telling me you have the perfect system for beating the Lottery. I'm going to admit that you might, might be right. However I'm not going to empty my Savings account on the chance that you might be right. I may hand you a dollar and tell you to put me in on some of that action, but I'm not buying in all the way.
So no, telling me the CIA is certain is not in any way proof of anything in my mind. I've learned to be suspicious of the CIA. Because I can't help but remember that the CIA was the first folks out there asking what the hell the Arab Spring was, and assuring the administration that the dictators who were being protested against, were going to put the riots down and restore order. Fall of the Berlin Wall, nobody saw that coming.
Yeah, I'm saying the CIA tends to see what isn't there, and doesn't see what is there. IF the CIA came out and swore it wasn't the Russians, I'd probably suspect the Russians a lot more.
The CIA are the ones who told us that they were absolutely certain that a factory was being used to create Chemical Weapons. President Bill Clinton ordered it bombed, and we were roundly chastised in the Worlds Press for bombing an Asperin factory.
Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory - Wikipedia
We were certain thanks to the CIA, and we were wrong, again thanks to the CIA. Iraqi WMD's, assessments of groups that were actually Terrorists that the CIA said were moderate. It's not a question of what the CIA got wrong, it's more along the lines of what they ever got right?
The CIA has a long history of missing things, or getting them wrong. The CIA somehow missed the massing of troops in North Korea before the invasion of the South in 1950. The CIA was wrong about China coming into that same war. Oh they'll never do it.
The CIA got quite a bit wrong, screwed up quite a bit, but that's not all. The Walker Spy Ring was able to work right under their noses for decades. Despite overwhelming evidence that someone was tipping the Soviet's off, nobody in the CIA thought to question Aldrich Ames, one of the few people with access to all the information that had leaked to the Soviets.
It goes on, and on, and on. CIA screw up after CIA mistake. Now, with this record in mind, we turn to the claim that the CIA is certain that the Russians were involved in the hacking of the DNC and Podesta emails. OK, first let's go back a bit. Wasn't it the FBI, State, and CIA departments that told us they were certain that nobody hacked Hillary's email server?
How certain are they, more or less certain than they were that the Asperin factory was making VX gas? Are you more certain, or less that Iraq had WMD's?
That's what so funny to me. People who would be swearing that the CIA is making it up if the President was W are the same ones who are stomping their foot now and screaming that the CIA are certain and why isn't that good enough for you?
Yes Obama is President. Yes, Obama's appointed Director is in charge. The problem is that the drones in the basement who are the ones putting together the reports are the same drones who were in the basement when the Boston Bombers were identified by Russian Intelligence and who were unable to overcome a "typo" to identify them before dozens were killed and wounded.
Telling me the CIA is certain is sort of like telling me you have the perfect system for beating the Lottery. I'm going to admit that you might, might be right. However I'm not going to empty my Savings account on the chance that you might be right. I may hand you a dollar and tell you to put me in on some of that action, but I'm not buying in all the way.
So no, telling me the CIA is certain is not in any way proof of anything in my mind. I've learned to be suspicious of the CIA. Because I can't help but remember that the CIA was the first folks out there asking what the hell the Arab Spring was, and assuring the administration that the dictators who were being protested against, were going to put the riots down and restore order. Fall of the Berlin Wall, nobody saw that coming.
Yeah, I'm saying the CIA tends to see what isn't there, and doesn't see what is there. IF the CIA came out and swore it wasn't the Russians, I'd probably suspect the Russians a lot more.
