<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;All the News that Fits, We Print&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.radioactivechief.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=715" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=715</link>
	<description>Stronghold of the VRWC in northwestern Moody County, South Dakota</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2014 14:47:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.38</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: wbealsd</title>
		<link>http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=715&#038;cpage=1#comment-17</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[wbealsd]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2006 15:24:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.radioactivechief.com/?p=715#comment-17</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Of course the NYT is guilty of, if not treasonous behavior, extreme stupidity bordering on self destructive insanity.  

To further demonstrate the effect of this type of activity, the following is from National Review Online:
WHY CANÃ¢â‚¬â„¢T WE CONNECT THE DOTS? [Andy McCarthy]

Answer: Because we donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t even know what the dots are, and we conduct ourselves in a way that tells the world we donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t want to know. 

Bill Gertz, in an excellent Washington Times report this morning on what Derb might call Ã¢â‚¬Å“Intelligence DesignÃ¢â‚¬Â Ã¢â‚¬â€œ but Gertz calls Ã¢â‚¬Å“Intelligence IntransigenceÃ¢â‚¬Â Ã¢â‚¬â€œ gives us the simple reason why the CIA canÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t find anything out:

Other officials said the CIA&#039;s espionage branch continues to be hobbled by too few trained and experienced case officers. The total number of deployed intelligence officers, those working in the field as spies and spy handlers, is fewer than 1,000. During the 1980s, the CIA had as many as 8,000 case officers around the world. That number declined sharply during the 1990s because of budget cutbacks and disillusioned agency officers who left, citing restrictions and difficulties in carrying out their missions.

The shortage of overseas case officers has created an overreliance on setting up liaison ties to foreign services, and in many nations, including those in South America, the CIA station is limited to one officer who relies on information from foreign intelligence. Often that information cannot be verified, thereby making its use limited. 

No exaggeration gang: less than one thousand case officers to cover the entire globe, which marks a reduction of about NINETY PERCENT during the Clinton years from Reagan administration levels. 

And you might ask: Why would those foreign intelligence services on which we are so dependent tell us anything? Giving information to the United States is the surest way to compromise their sources and methods. When we develop secret programs that yield valuable information, they are exposed by the New York Times and the Washington Post. Instead of congressional investigations into, and outrage about, the leaks, we proceed with hearings about the legality of the programs Ã¢â‚¬â€œ and find senators interrogating our intelligence chiefs in open sessions (the ones our enemies monitor just like everyone else does) about whether there are any other top secret programs the government hasnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t made public.

And all this less than five years removed from 9/11. Remarkable.



]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course the NYT is guilty of, if not treasonous behavior, extreme stupidity bordering on self destructive insanity.  </p>
<p>To further demonstrate the effect of this type of activity, the following is from National Review Online:<br />
WHY CANÃ¢â‚¬â„¢T WE CONNECT THE DOTS? [Andy McCarthy]</p>
<p>Answer: Because we donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t even know what the dots are, and we conduct ourselves in a way that tells the world we donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t want to know. </p>
<p>Bill Gertz, in an excellent Washington Times report this morning on what Derb might call Ã¢â‚¬Å“Intelligence DesignÃ¢â‚¬Â Ã¢â‚¬â€œ but Gertz calls Ã¢â‚¬Å“Intelligence IntransigenceÃ¢â‚¬Â Ã¢â‚¬â€œ gives us the simple reason why the CIA canÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t find anything out:</p>
<p>Other officials said the CIA&#8217;s espionage branch continues to be hobbled by too few trained and experienced case officers. The total number of deployed intelligence officers, those working in the field as spies and spy handlers, is fewer than 1,000. During the 1980s, the CIA had as many as 8,000 case officers around the world. That number declined sharply during the 1990s because of budget cutbacks and disillusioned agency officers who left, citing restrictions and difficulties in carrying out their missions.</p>
<p>The shortage of overseas case officers has created an overreliance on setting up liaison ties to foreign services, and in many nations, including those in South America, the CIA station is limited to one officer who relies on information from foreign intelligence. Often that information cannot be verified, thereby making its use limited. </p>
<p>No exaggeration gang: less than one thousand case officers to cover the entire globe, which marks a reduction of about NINETY PERCENT during the Clinton years from Reagan administration levels. </p>
<p>And you might ask: Why would those foreign intelligence services on which we are so dependent tell us anything? Giving information to the United States is the surest way to compromise their sources and methods. When we develop secret programs that yield valuable information, they are exposed by the New York Times and the Washington Post. Instead of congressional investigations into, and outrage about, the leaks, we proceed with hearings about the legality of the programs Ã¢â‚¬â€œ and find senators interrogating our intelligence chiefs in open sessions (the ones our enemies monitor just like everyone else does) about whether there are any other top secret programs the government hasnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t made public.</p>
<p>And all this less than five years removed from 9/11. Remarkable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
