The baghdad broadcasting system weighs in with opinions from unnamed "analysts" disguised as news.

How pathetic is this?

Two people resign in a huge agency, life will go on. As someone elsewhere on this site so aptly noted: the world will continue to turn.

The BBC's so far gone, it's just so annoying.

But analysts say the moon may in fact be made of green cheese. And they wonder why Blair took em on.

The function of journalists is to tell you what happened.

There's no rule sez you have to like it.

Fact of the matter is, the CIA's performance has been Lousy across the board in this matter.

But then, so was the DIAs performance, and worst of all was the Office of Special Plans in the Pentagon. Their hired help, the sockpuppet Chalabi, told them what they wanted to know, and got them to pay him for the service.

It isn't as though folks hereon weren't told months ago. Y'all just couldn't quite believe it even as it was happening.

Don, help us here: how does quoting unnamed analysts constitute reporting about what happened?

And yes, it is the function of journalists to tell us what happened and many of wish they would do their jobs.

the BBC snippet that launched this thread is a stunning example of the kind of bias many of his are up in arms about.

Think theyll go down with this sinking ship? Thats reserved for the captain. .. Just a few more months.

Skip,

news reports, even in conservative news outlets like Fox (which I think is a good network) and the WSJ as well as the Washiington Times all use unamed sources and quite often. More so when dealing with the Pentagon or CIA...otherwise nothing would be reported about anything serious from any institution.

I may not like the way BBC reports some news as well, but to go after them for using unnamed sources would be wrong.

News source rules include "off the record", "deep background" and "background" and "on the record." It is quite rare to find someone saying what they mean on a controversial issue "on the record."

In the case of the Tenet resignation per se, Fox, WSJ and Washington Times all have included background (unamed source) in their stories.

What happened?

The guy quit. BBC got that right. We can discuss whether or not it was a timely retirement, or just coincidence, or whatever. But the fact is, he really did quit.

The "analysts" say it will mean more upheaval.

Just No Doubt about it -- it will mean that. There is already upheaval, and there will be more. The Company doesn't lose its top two without there being some, maybe even a whole lot more upheaval.

Now then -- what's the complaint Really about here?

To get right answers about the Company, ask Michael Riconnischuto in the Springfield, Missouri
Federal Mind Control OPS. The smartest man I know, That's why no one can reach him to get the truth out, to Tell It Like It Is.

Bob, Tell It Like It Is Newspaper, 4146 S.R. 136 West, Henderson, Ky 42420 270-827-2567

I'll quote the old saw:

Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence.
Three times is enemy action.

Good chance this is a disagreement between CIA and the Whitehouse about outing Cheney on the Plame affair.

or just quitting in shame after debacles like the chinese embassy in kosovo, 911 failure, the North Korean nuclear blackmail and now chalabi getting paid by both us AND the iranians and feeding the CIA false info. Along with that, it is fashionable to be anti-Bush and profitable for many in government. Look for the 60 minutes book deal soon.
The restructuring of homeland security is now taking another step; it is not Bush's custom to criticize employees or agencies. IT IS IMPLICIT.

Fraq,

The word is that New Jersey is in play.

A Demo operative from the state say that it can't be true but if it is it means Bush in a landslide.

My prediction Bush in a landslide.

hound,

Typically double agents get paid by both sides.

The question is who was Chalabi really working for? Perhaps his unmasking is just another part of the game.

msimon, I can only WISH for a Bush landslide - but I doubt it. Government employees have learned they can vote their wages. People receiving their only check from the government ( up to 50% of adults in many states) SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO VOTE. Along with that the (DFL) have virtually controlled the education of our children for many decades. Also, Republicans believe in hard work, personal responsibility and ethics, which can be a hard road to travel.

Re: Chalabi - I agree - the plot is still unfolding....But you must admit - the CIA seemed to be admitting failure - a rare event...

Landslide huh? right, have you seen the polls lately bub?

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: