Sunday, December 12, 2004


Here's a hypothetical: I am being asked to go deep under cover in Venezuela or Cuba. The job is very dangerous. They want me to contact opposition leaders to evaluate their strength and to see if it would be worthwhile to give them some help. (Ordinarily, that is something that I would dearly love to do.) Somewhere up my chain of command, sitting at the Venezuela or Cuba desk at the CIA headquarters is Michael Moore, or Ed Asner or, (for the movie version) Alec Baldwin. Would I take the job? NOT IN A MILLION YEARS! The chances of my being betrayed in a situation like that are astronomical. Those people would see me killed and pat themselves on the back for having "done good."

Okay. Change the cast. Now it's the normal, everyday, CIA employees in the chain of command. Would I take the job? NOT IN A MILLION YEARS! It is almost certain that there would be a flaming liberal somewhere in that chain. Probably a lot of them. I'm sure that most of them are loyal Americans and dedicated employees. But all it takes in one Bush-hating, Chavez/Castro-loving clown, and I am toast.

The truth of the matter is that I would not work for the CIA anywhere in the world.
Once they got up to 20,000 or 30,000 (or whatever the number is) employees, they got out of control. To think that they are not deeply penetrated by all kinds of agents is totally naive. And the recent liberal Bush-hating group insanity multiplies the problem.

That is a very serious problem and I honestly don't know the answer except to minimize the number of people who could betray the precious field agents.

UPDATE: Not long after I posted this some idiot in "The New Yorker" disclosed that we have units infiltrating Iran looking for nuclear sites. He wrote there were multiple teams and described their M. O. Is this not treason? How could an American writer do something like that? How could an American magazine allow such a thing to be published? I'm not a fan of torture, but here I would make an exception. I would gladly do it myself and continue after he had told his source and everything else he knew.

Of course he has an excuse: He's a liberal first and an American second.

UPDATE: And also a reporter for the New York Times writes that a blogger in Baghdad might be a CIA agent. Does she know that this put his life in danger? Of course she does. It was her intention to silence that man. Why? Because he was continuosly posting positive reports on what was happening in Iraq. This enraged the reporter because she is a liberal and liberals have a vested interest in the failure of America in Iraq.


Post a Comment

<< Home