Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
CBD:
cbd at cutjibnewsletter.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com


Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Captain Whitebread 2026
Jon Ekdahl 2026
Jay Guevara 2025
Jim Sunk New Dawn 2025
Jewells45 2025
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups

Texas MoMe 2026: 10/16/2026-10/17/2026 Corsicana,TX
Contact Ben Had for info





















« Update on Kim Jong Ill? | Main | Okay, It Really Does Look Like a Mobile Home »
November 18, 2004

Pentagon Cheers CIA Shake Up

As well they should. While the Pentagon is fighting enemy fighters and terrorists, the liberal pansies at the CIA are fighting American policy.

It seems to me that the liberals at the CIA view their oath of secrecy as provisional at most-- if there's a liberal President, and they support his policies, they'll honor their oath. If they don't like the President, they pretend they had their fingers crossed the whole time.

Typical of this:

[Defense officials] say analysts expressed opposition to going to war with Iraq and filed overly pessimistic reports that seemed to always leak to the liberal press. One senior official told The Washington Times last year of an Iraq station chief's dire predictions on Iraq. The station chief's report leaked to the press within days of its arrival in Washington. What seemed odd to this Pentagon official was that the dispatch contained a long list of "CCs" all the way down to Navy battle group commanders at sea, meaning tens of thousands saw the report.

"This report was designed to leak," the official charged.

Get rid of him. He obviously wants to be a reporter rather than a spook. He'll be much happier as an expert analyst on Aaron Brown's show.


posted by Ace at 03:24 PM
Comments



Ace--

The Powerline report rings very true to me. Not a lot of people in the Building seem to like the Langley fellows.

Sure, we complain about *all* the intel guys, but that's just because they're bureaucratic (NSA), weird (DIA), or weirder (NRO).

The CIA, however, seems filled with people whose families tree never quite seem to branch. I've got friends who work there, some I'd consider good friends, but there's obviously a very unique type of character they go after to the exclusion of others.

That insularity/elitism can be helpful in the right environment (I'm thinking Special Forces), but at CIA, it seems to basically just breed snobbish know-it-all pricks who enjoy feeling important more than being important.

But hey, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Cheers,
Dave

Posted by: Dave at Garfield Ridge on November 18, 2004 03:37 PM

Ace,

Excellent points here. While I worked in the five sided building (95-97), I never knew any spooks who were disloyal. They just didn't seem to think our use of their product was as important as their ability to generate the product. Therefore, it always seemed like their race was to get info to fill in their blanks on the message template, and send the message and forget about answering questions their product would bring up.

Granted, I was a counterdrug wienie, and our requests did not involve glamorous requests for things they could give us, but every time I needed to talk to a CIA spook, they treated us as if we were beneath their horizon, even when we were going to give them money to do something. Couldn't be bothered. Loyal to no one but their own organization.

Everyone I met in the Pentagon at least had some degree of loyalty to their country, their service and to doing what was right. If the rules said we couldn't do something, there were plenty of folks who would refuse to let you do something. But they sympathized with you when you could show a true need to do something to save American lives and money. One of the most important traits of the military man or woman is the ability to plead your case to your boss with enthusiasm and backbone. And when the boss makes his decision, to shut up and carry it out as if it was your own decision. Loyalty went up and down my chain of command, even in Bill Clinton's Pentagon. (My boss was a good guy who learned he couldn't play politics in that building with military folks, and he turned out to be a great guy.)

Based on what I am seeing in the media today, it is time for CIA to quit playing politics, and get back to loyalty to your country, especially in the dirty jobs which they don't like to do, and for people they hate. He's the boss. No government bureaucrat has the right to obstruct legal policy directed by elected officials. 'Nuff said.

Subsunk

Posted by: Subsunk on November 18, 2004 04:03 PM

Ace--

Ditto everything Subsunk says.

Cheers,
Dave

Posted by: Dave at Garfield Ridge on November 18, 2004 04:06 PM

IMHO CIA would benefit from some military leadership a la the NSA. I worked at NSA for a few years many years ago and I can't fathom the type of shenanigans being tolerated there that go on at CIA.

P.S. CedarTroll was right. I was just a rear echelon f*** :)

Posted by: BrewFan on November 18, 2004 07:27 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?








Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]
Top Headlines
Funniest thing I've read about the Virginia mess. Back when they were hustling the referendum through the assembly both Senators, Warner and Kaine, advised them to go slow and play by the rules. Louise Lucas said she respected them but didn't need advice from the "cuck chair" in the corner. The gerrymandering was overturned and Louise is heading for the big house. Edward G. Robinson voice "where's your cuck now?"
Posted by: Smell the Glove

I posted his post on twitter and it's gotten 25K views so far. Thanks, Smell the Glove
Chris
@chriswithans

aaahahaa.jpg


"Ahhhhh ahh I put my career on the line for Louise Lucas and Jay Jones thinking they'd vault me into presidential contention and we ended up costing Democrats 20 House seats and unleashing a Reverse Dobbs ahhhhh ahhh"
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click That Sums Up the Democrat Communist Party Today
Something is wrong as I hold you near
Somebody else holds your heart, yeah
You turn to me with your icy tears
And then it's raining, feels like it's raining
"It's f**king f**ked."
-- reportedly a genuine comment offered by a "senior Labour source"
Correction: I wrote that Labour is losing 88% (now 87%) of the seats it is "defending." I think that's wrong. The right way to say it is the seats they are contesting -- that is, they don't necessarily already hold these seats, but they have put up a candidate to run for the seat. It's still very bad but not as bad as losing 87% of the seats they already held.
Basil the Great
@BasilTheGreat

🚨ED MILIBAND [a Minister in Starmer's government] SAYS KEIR STARMER WILL RESIGN AS PRIME MINISTER

He has reportedly reassured Labour MP's that Starmer will be resigning following the disastrous results tonight

It's over
"The end of the two party system in the UK" as first the Fake Conservatives and now Labour chooses political suicide rather than simply STOPPING THE INVASION
Incidentally, the only reason this didn't already happen in the US is because of the Very Bad Orange Man (who is right on 85% of all policy calls and extremely, existentially right on 15% of them)
No political party that is NOT also a doomsday religious cult would EVER choose a cataclysmic loss -- and possible extinction as a party -- to support a toxically unpopular favoritism of NON-CITIZEN ILLEGAL MIGRANTS over actual citizen voters.

Only a cult does this.
Now they've lost 84%.
Annunziata Rees-Mogg
@zatzi
If this continues Labour loses 2,148 seats tonight.

That is much worse than the worst case predictions I’ve seen.

Cataclysmic

Update: They've now lost 88% of the seats they're defending. As I mentioned earlier, I think I heard that London will not bail them out, as many of those Labour seats will probably flip to "Muslim Independent" or Green. Detroit's 5am vote will not save them.
Yup, Labour is losing 80% of its seats...
The British Patriot
@TheBritLad

🚨 BREAKING: Labour have lost 80% of all seats contested as of 2:25 AM.<
br> If this continues, Keir Starmer will be out of office next week.

Reform has surged and projected to pick up between 1700-2100 seats.


Wow, up to 1700-2100 seats. It's not incredible that this is happening. It's incredible that the Davos crowd is so absolutely determined to privilege Muslim "migrants" over the actual native population who elects them, no matter how loudly the natives scream that they want to be prioritized, that they will gladly self-extinguish as a party rather than simply representing the interests of their own voters. Astonishing.
Remember, when they call other people "cultists" -- they are the ones so imprisoned in their social reinforcement and discipline bubbles that they will choose political death rather than dare upset the Karen Enforcement Officers of their cult.
Update: Now they've lost 83% of the seats they were defending.
(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges

Reform are basically wiping Labour out in the North. It's not a defeat. It's not even a rout. Labour are simply ceasing to exist.


Nick Lowles
@lowles_nick

Tonight’s results are calamitous for Labour. Not just for Keir Starmer's leadership, but for the very future of the party
STARMERGEDDON: In early returns, Reform gains 135 seats, Labour loses 90, the Fake Conservatives lose 36 (and I didn't even know they could fall any further), the Lib Dems lose 4, and the Greens gain 6. Note that the only other party gaining seats is the Greens and they're only gaining a handful of seats.
Update: Reform now up 145, Labour down 98.
Labour projected to lose Wales -- where they've ruled for 27 years.
Fulton County Georgia just discovered 400 boxes of ballots for Labour
Update: REF +156, LAB -107, CON -45
Brutal: In four out of five council seats where Labour is defending, they've lost. 80%.
I'm sure it's not this simple, but Reform is straight taking Labour's and the "Conservatives'" seats. They've lost almost exactly what Reform gained. If understand this right (and warning, I probably don't), all of London's council seats are up for election, and Labour might lose hugely there, as their old voters abandon them for Reform, Muslim Indenpendents, and the Greens.
REF +190, LAB -134, CON -56.
Updates on the Labour collapse in council elections -- which wags are calling #Starmergeddon -- from Beege Welborne. There are about 5000 seats up for grabs, Labour is expected to lose 1,800, Reform will probably gain 1,580, up from... zero. So this would be more than that.
People claim that while Labour has adopted the Sharia Agenda to appeal to the million Muslims it allowed to migrate to the country, those voters are ditching Labour to vote for the Muslim Independent Party or the Greens. Delicious. This shadenfreude is going straight to my thighs.
Oh, and if Starmer loses about as badly as expected, Labour will toss him out of a window Braveheart style and replace him. He will announce he is resigning to spend more time with his Gay Ukrainian Male Prostitutes.
Media bias and senationalism are as old as, well, the media:
spidermanthreatormenace.jpg

That was written by Denny O'Neill and illustrated by, get this, Frank Miller. Editor to the Stars Jim Shooter was in charge at the time.
I always thought the gag was original to the comic book, but in fact the "Threat or Menace" headline was a satirical joke about media bias and sensationalism for a long while. The Harvard Lampoon used it in a parody of Life magazine: "Flying Saucers: Threat or Menace?"
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: Starting a new season, CBD and Sefton discuss their personal journeys to conservative principles, is Nick Shirley the beginning of a trend?, Iran trying to reignite the war, the Left attacks itself, even on "Best Guitarist" lists, and more!
Recent Comments
pawn: ""Most of the old soviet leaders are very concerned ..."

Skip: "AW especially if they lose, or win and think they ..."

Anonosaurus Wrecks: "Its going to be a rough year until the mid term el ..."

Anonosaurus Wrecks: "Shall I compare thee to a blazing Molotov cocktail ..."

Rev. Wishbone: "My great uncle worked for NASA on the Apollo progr ..."

Skip: "Virginia Marxists freak over the Va Supreme Court ..."

Maj. Healey [/i]: "Alex Jones seeming less crazy every day. ..."

FenelonSpoke: "Posted by: InZona at May 09, 2026 12:32 PM (XiTQh) ..."

doug: "and jazz hands ..."

Piper: "I am surprised people are seeing the Fosse influen ..."

Skip: "Read recently foreigners do think everything here ..."

Ian S.: "[i]May be something to that. One of the phrases th ..."

Bloggers in Arms
Some Humorous Asides
Archives