Tuesday, April 21, 2009

ANTI OBAMA EDITORIAL IN WASH POST: CIA Techniques Helped War on Terror

This editorial (be warned, you might need free membership with Post to read it) surprised me as generally the Washington Post generally licks the soles of Obama's feet.  Thus a well structured and potent argument citing specific instances in which our "enhanced" tactics have lead to actionable intelligence in the Post caught my attention.  Obama might have appeased a bunch of college students and burnt out hippies but this will be a mistake later.  

It was good to see similar reporting coming out oф drudge (links a msnbc article citing the NYT).   Glad officials are setting the record straight on what Obama released and what he didn't.  Bet your ass that the administration is going to try to defend itself over this gaffe, and it will develop a life of its own.   

Must suck to know that not everyone in your administration is going to allow you to get away with whatever you want. 

11 comments:

  1. ARGH! I promise that I edit my school assignments...These are poorly off the cuff...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey, it's a blog, and also you have editorial capability to go back in and clean it up if you feel like it! We read each other's and come up with a better overall article or understanding!

    Yeah, I saw this mentioned at Ace's and Instapundit's. It sounds like the CIA is answering "Our Darth Lord Cheney"'s (to do Ace-speak) request to get the whole story out there.

    Now Obama knows how Bush felt when his administration was stabbing him in the back!

    ReplyDelete
  3. How do you edit your previous post? Bunch of noobs here....

    Ace has posted another editorial from the Wash Post indicating the impact of this memo:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/21/AR2009042102969.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

    The Robinson Talking Points should keep an eye on David Ignatius (he was also well liked by my Nat'l Security/Intelligence Policy Professor).

    For the record: I'm still sticking to my guns that some of these methods are destructive to our overall image in the war against terrorism. That said, Obama didn't have to reveal this information (which is even worse to that image) and let the long arm of the Freedom of Information Act to eventually get its hands on it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If you sign into the blog, you'll see that there are pencils after all the articles. Click on the pencil and you'll be able to get back into the post and edit it. At least I can. Maybe only the administrator can, but I think you can too. Let me know if you can't and I'll see what we can do to fix that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Okay, now I figured it out. Большой Спасибо!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. It does seem like the press is strangely not supporting Obama on this. Almost like they're treating an issue critically or something rather than covering for him. What's the deal?!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I don't know. Maybe they had a collective board meeting and realized that conservatives want to read newspapers too, so they decided to expand their opinion spectrum to cater to a larger consumer base...

    Who knows

    ReplyDelete
  9. Wait wait wait! What if the press was balanced? Would that spell the end of the Robinson Talking Points?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Good question. Luckily we won't have to worry about that!

    ReplyDelete