English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

the Bush-Cheney administration outed an undercover CIA agent working to protect our nation from WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION,,, could this be this the worst crime in US History?

2007-03-16 13:06:11 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Government

if the US government will out their own undercover agents (NEVER BEFORE IN AMERICAN HISTORY, until now),, what would be the incintive (besides money) to join the CIA?

2007-03-17 14:12:33 · update #1

15 answers

No. The terrorists who attacked US buildings were right-wing fundamentalist, the woman had no say and could be beaten or sold to pay off a debt, etc. They were very anti-gay and very anti liberal freedoms. Much how our pro-life supporters are right-wing fundamentalists who voted for such laws as it being OK for a husband to rape his wife, in many states.

2007-03-16 13:12:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

You are right in one sense: Osama bin Laden was a creation of the USA and became an enemy largely because of the efforts of the neo-cons. Both USA and the Mujaheddin thought that they had defeated the Soviet Union, when it was clear to even the most casual observer that the USSR had imploded under its own stagnation.
Buoyed by what they both thought was a decisive victory of their own making, both the neo-cons and Osama's mob wanted to spread their wings elsewhere: throughout the secular Muslim world and against Iraq.
Bush Sr was sceptical about the neo-cons and knew when the mission was accomplished. (Unlike whatshisname.)
The radical Islamists also collapsed under their own in-fighting and illogical.
Along come the neo-cons again with a blank slate in the White House and some stale ideas fresh from the microwave.
The neo-cons didn't call the 11 September bombers liberal, gay or pro-abortion. But they did have labels for them (after their relatives and friends were whisked away despite the no-fly ban.)
In the days after 11 September 2001, there was a great deal of goodwill around the world towards the tragedy in New York. The victims were international and interfaith.
All of that good faith was blown when Bush Jr decided that the United Nations wasn't good enough and that unilateral and senseless violence was the only answer.

And Jerry Falwell's contribution to the "debate" might make you wonder and was probably the ironic source of the question.

Anyone who thinks that Scooter Libby's received a show trial should read James Carville's "And the Horse He Rode in on" from a description of "justice" under the conservatives. Bush Jr is so lucky that the Democrats are boxing clever at the moment. If they were as militant as the Republicans were against Bill Clinton, GWB would have been impeached by now. They are going to do him slowly and from the inside out.

2007-03-16 14:53:29 · answer #2 · answered by templeblot 3 · 1 0

I don't know anything about their religion or politics, except that they hated america and everything it stands for. However I don't think that is the worst crime ever in the 200 years of American history -- and I'm sure that there isn't just one person in charge of protecting the entire nation against weapons of mass destruction it would be a pretty difficult job.

2007-03-16 13:46:57 · answer #3 · answered by Okaydokay21 4 · 0 3

To your two irrelevant Qs:

1. Terrorists have nothing to do with Neocon zionists.

2. Yes Valerie was on a mission to protect US, Cheny/Bush/Rove betrayed the trus and became the enemy of US all!

2007-03-16 14:10:25 · answer #4 · answered by YupChubby 2 · 4 0

wow.... I know we are supposed to put a full answer here, but I think that requires a well thought out question...

I am so sick of people blaming Liberals or media for the administration representing us to the world as idiots!

2007-03-16 16:37:30 · answer #5 · answered by pharoahmoan 2 · 0 0

keep in mind him on the united statesLincoln with the banner 'undertaking carried out?' he's/replaced into an particularly naive guy. it extremely is the reason the neocons hijacked his foreign places coverage and he sent us to Iraq, usa's best foreign places coverage debacle ever.

2016-10-02 06:11:21 · answer #6 · answered by eidemiller 4 · 0 0

Im not sure if I completely understand what youre asking but as I understand the situation with the Libby Trial I dont think its so much of a concern with just what got out but the erroneous information that would come out in the questioning. I believe this is why none of the senior white house staff ever came in to testify, probably because of the chance that it could incriminate them and it would do little to gain an aquittal as evidenced by guilty virdicts on all but one charge.

2007-03-16 13:12:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

I think My Lai was maybe just a teensy bit worse, perhaps? Or Guantanamo Bay? Or the nuclear attacks on Japan? Or the genocide of the Native Americans?

One ousted agent doesn't really compare. It's bad, yes, but not that bad.

2007-03-16 13:09:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

One ques at a time...
1. I think they had to be pro-abortion, since basically they aborted full-term babies when they killed all those people. And they were liberal, yes, because they killed people of all race, creed, color and orientation. I don't know if they were gay or not. Heck, I'll go out on a limb and say...."maybe".

2. People get outed all the time, stop freaking out, this is just the top newstory right now to get our minds off of Viet Raq I mean Iraqi Nam.

2007-03-16 13:09:43 · answer #9 · answered by Munya Says: DUH! 7 · 1 5

Another silly question...who knows what the political views of the terrorists were? The rest of the babble is just that, babble, Valarie what's her name (not worth acknowledging) was not outed by Cheney and Bush. I know her testimony and the prospect of having more hearings makes the Liberals salivate but that doesn't make it true!

2007-03-16 13:12:25 · answer #10 · answered by rosi l 5 · 0 5

fedest.com, questions and answers