Posted by Alexander from 18.104.22.168.cfl.rr.com (22.214.171.124) on Saturday, September 06, 2003 at 11:57PM :
In Reply to: Re: Synopsis posted by farid from customer-148-233-71-32.uninet.net.mx (126.96.36.199) on Saturday, September 06, 2003 at 8:32PM :
Here we go.......
<: The CIA doesn't have to succed all the time...what does? You or I will never know...that's at least a part of their job they do better than most.
Actually, I have proof that the CIA failed the vast majority of its planned operations, besides its usual business of smuggling arms and weaponry, and funding puppets in governments.
<: If I had told you in 1967 that I felt strongly that Johnson lied about the Gulf of Tonkin, you would have asked for proof...and stopped there. If I'd said Nixon was bugging his own people and paying people to break into the odffices of the opposition and plant incriminating letter and other things, you'd have said I was paranoid...
Regarding Nixon, he was set up by the CIA because he wanted to create a "domestic intelligence agency" and was in competition with the CIA. The CIA made it look obvious, on purpose, and he was caught. He was a fool who was played by the CIA, I give the CIA credit there(yes, I have proof).
<if I told you that Kuwaiti princess was really an actress and there were no babies toseed out of incubators you'd have said I was a cynic projecting my own paranoia on the world. Luckily we have proof...for at least those...
I never believed those lies about the incubators.
<so you can't call me names...
I never did call you names.
<but if I told you there were no WMD's in Iraq and I told you the United States has been pushing and pushing Muslims for years now...waiting and hoping for a counter-attack...and if I told you they knew damn well what was coming...that it had been part of the overall plan...and if I told you the United States would go kill Afghanis and then kill Iraqis..without once proving a thing about Al Qaida or bothered with any links...you'd have said and I quote, "the US is not that powerful"
Exactly right, that's what I would say, when with all their technology and money and influence, they cannot even take Afghanistan or Iraq, other than bombing some areas, because they have no control of Afghanistan, except some influence in Kabul, and in Iraq the war is still ongoing, unlike what you said that Saddam just gave up, this war is yet to be fought.
Regarding its being so "powerful," what's so powerful about doing those things? I don't see any power in it, a lot of countries do it, why should the CIA stand out? As for the CIA, it is ineffecient, and due to its ineffeciency, someone founded another organisation(agency), that was able to perform much more successfully.
<I'm glad I was wrong.
It is not about being wrong or right, but about challenging each others' views and perspectives, in order to try to gain a better idea of the whole picture.
-- signature .
Post a Followup