Comments on: McGovern vs. Scheuer on the Panetta CIA Nomination http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/01/07/mcgovern-vs-scheuer-on-the-panetta-cia-nomination/ Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:45:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Thomas http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/01/07/mcgovern-vs-scheuer-on-the-panetta-cia-nomination/comment-page-1/#comment-166341 Thomas Fri, 09 Jan 2009 03:09:13 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=5127#comment-166341 Ray McGovern is a HERO to me..... He is not afraid to stick his neck out AND he has his PRIORITIES in an enlightened order........... As for Scheurer WTF I like him BUT THIS... "We have had a good director now in General Hayden, who has inspired the workforce to be proud of itself. He has supported the expansion of clandestine operations. And, more importantly, he has defended the agency publicly." HUH??? Kinda reminds me of Rodney Dangerfield.....Poor CIA can't get NO RESPECT ??? Yeah.. BUT Were they sodomizing children in FRONT of their MOTHERS to get them to give up the WHEREABOUTS of their Husbands ?? Gotta B reel PROUD o DAT !!....???????????????? I AND wasn't Hayden head of NSA on 911 ?? YOO... He HEARS no EVIL B4 911 ?? JUST the type for a Shrub promotion.. Seems like all the CLUELESS INCOMPETENTS [or worse COMPLICIT] BOZOZ got PROMOTED under Shrub regime......... ARE these GUYs the onez ya wanna keep in a new ADMINISTRATION ?? A new ADMINISTRATION might want to keep its EYES and EARS OPEN!! I think Hayden is DIRTY with 911 BLOOD on hiz HANDS !!! Didn't Shrub promote HEAD of NORAD too ?? "If you are a WORLD CLASS F*CK UP weez gonna PROMOTE you to the TOP JOB..." The Shrub "DOCTRINE" I agree with Michael Scheuer often and his understanding of many of the international players is excellent..... But HAYDEN ?? KINDA MAKES ME WONDER..... I wouldn't leave my DOG at his house..... and for ME...incompetence... I'm NOT buying it... I think that Michael Hayden is a player or willfully BLIND to 911 CONSPIRACY.... All those HUNDREDS of BILLIONS on equipment, personel and NADA ??? Come-on It's a JOKE.... Yaa RIGHT.....?? Ray McGovern is a HERO to me….. He is not afraid to stick his neck out AND he has his

PRIORITIES in an enlightened order……….. As for Scheurer WTF I like him BUT THIS…

“We have had a good director now in General Hayden, who has inspired the workforce to be proud of itself. He has supported the expansion of clandestine operations. And, more importantly, he has defended the agency publicly.”

HUH??? Kinda reminds me of Rodney Dangerfield…..Poor CIA can’t get NO RESPECT ??? Yeah..

BUT Were they sodomizing children in FRONT of their MOTHERS to get them to give up the

WHEREABOUTS of their Husbands ?? Gotta B reel PROUD o DAT !!….????????????????

I AND wasn’t Hayden head of NSA on 911 ?? YOO… He HEARS no EVIL B4 911 ?? JUST the

type for a Shrub promotion.. Seems like all the CLUELESS INCOMPETENTS [or worse COMPLICIT]

BOZOZ got PROMOTED under Shrub regime……… ARE these GUYs the onez ya wanna keep in a

new ADMINISTRATION ?? A new ADMINISTRATION might want to keep its EYES and EARS OPEN!!

I think Hayden is DIRTY with 911 BLOOD on hiz HANDS !!! Didn’t Shrub promote HEAD of NORAD

too ?? “If you are a WORLD CLASS F*CK UP weez gonna PROMOTE you to the TOP JOB…” The

Shrub “DOCTRINE”

I agree with Michael Scheuer often and his understanding of many of the international players is excellent….. But HAYDEN ?? KINDA MAKES ME WONDER…..

I wouldn’t leave my DOG at his house….. and for ME…incompetence… I’m NOT buying it…

I think that Michael Hayden is a player or willfully BLIND to 911 CONSPIRACY…. All those

HUNDREDS of BILLIONS on equipment, personel and NADA ??? Come-on It’s a JOKE…. Yaa RIGHT…..??

]]> By: helmet http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/01/07/mcgovern-vs-scheuer-on-the-panetta-cia-nomination/comment-page-1/#comment-166340 helmet Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:45:25 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=5127#comment-166340 Does anyone know who said this, which of Scott's interviews? Does anyone know who said this, which of Scott’s interviews?

]]> By: liberranter http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/01/07/mcgovern-vs-scheuer-on-the-panetta-cia-nomination/comment-page-1/#comment-166325 liberranter Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:53:50 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=5127#comment-166325 I think the obvious answers to the three questions you ask are "of course not" for the first two and "yes" for the last. This, again, makes Scheuer ultimately no different in substance from the lawless neocon warmongers from whom he is attempting to separate himself. I think the obvious answers to the three questions you ask are “of course not” for the first two and “yes” for the last. This, again, makes Scheuer ultimately no different in substance from the lawless neocon warmongers from whom he is attempting to separate himself.

]]> By: liberranter http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/01/07/mcgovern-vs-scheuer-on-the-panetta-cia-nomination/comment-page-1/#comment-166321 liberranter Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:48:31 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=5127#comment-166321 <i>I should note that [Scheuer] was head of the CIA’s Osama bin Laden Unit under Clinton in the ’90s.</i> That pretty much says it all. Small wonder that his credentials as a "reformer" have always been questionable at best. I should note that [Scheuer] was head of the CIA’s Osama bin Laden Unit under Clinton in the ’90s.

That pretty much says it all. Small wonder that his credentials as a “reformer” have always been questionable at best.

]]> By: abraham http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/01/07/mcgovern-vs-scheuer-on-the-panetta-cia-nomination/comment-page-1/#comment-166320 abraham Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:40:12 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=5127#comment-166320 I don't call it the Lehrer Snooze Hour for nothing. Guests of all political stripes go on that show to spew their unfiltered propaganda without fear of being cut-off for saying stupid shit. I guess the hosts are trying to remain dispassionate and detached from the rhetoric that is constantly spewed across their debate table but it all amounts to a wankfest where horribly idiotic ideas go unquestioned and unchallenged. It is the most mentally discomfiting debate program on television. I don’t call it the Lehrer Snooze Hour for nothing. Guests of all political stripes go on that show to spew their unfiltered propaganda without fear of being cut-off for saying stupid shit. I guess the hosts are trying to remain dispassionate and detached from the rhetoric that is constantly spewed across their debate table but it all amounts to a wankfest where horribly idiotic ideas go unquestioned and unchallenged. It is the most mentally discomfiting debate program on television.

]]> By: abraham http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/01/07/mcgovern-vs-scheuer-on-the-panetta-cia-nomination/comment-page-1/#comment-166319 abraham Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:32:28 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=5127#comment-166319 This is America. I thought we were supposed to be better than advocating for torture. I understand that you are merely pointing out that you understand his POV, but his POV sucks ass and is un-American. He ought to be shunned and ostracized, now that his POV is understood for what it is. BTW, Ron Paul is also a fervent admirer of Reagan, for reasons which I'm still failing to grasp. This is America. I thought we were supposed to be better than advocating for torture. I understand that you are merely pointing out that you understand his POV, but his POV sucks ass and is un-American. He ought to be shunned and ostracized, now that his POV is understood for what it is.

BTW, Ron Paul is also a fervent admirer of Reagan, for reasons which I’m still failing to grasp.

]]> By: abraham http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/01/07/mcgovern-vs-scheuer-on-the-panetta-cia-nomination/comment-page-1/#comment-166316 abraham Thu, 08 Jan 2009 20:04:09 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=5127#comment-166316 Whereas I used to respect Scheuer, I've become increasingly dismayed with his writings as time has gone on. He is increasingly becoming more irrational in his thought, whereas before he was able to lucidly see the bigger picture. I've come to admire and respect McGovern deeply. I was especially impressed when he <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1FTmuhynaw" rel="nofollow">confronted Rumsfeld</a> about the fabricated WMD evidence in Iraq. Whatever McGovern advocates, I'm for that. The man has honesty and integrity, rare attributes in this day and age. Whereas I used to respect Scheuer, I’ve become increasingly dismayed with his writings as time has gone on. He is increasingly becoming more irrational in his thought, whereas before he was able to lucidly see the bigger picture.

I’ve come to admire and respect McGovern deeply. I was especially impressed when he confronted Rumsfeld about the fabricated WMD evidence in Iraq.

Whatever McGovern advocates, I’m for that. The man has honesty and integrity, rare attributes in this day and age.

]]> By: matt Fay http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/01/07/mcgovern-vs-scheuer-on-the-panetta-cia-nomination/comment-page-1/#comment-166313 matt Fay Thu, 08 Jan 2009 18:59:30 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=5127#comment-166313 From reading his books I think that is his larger point about interventionism - the idea being that we do need to see things from an outside perspective and see what the consequences of our policies are. Not knowing the man personally, I believe that if you asked him to choose between America "met[ing] out the parameterless punishment" or another country, he would undoubtedly say America. But that is also a false choice. That is why, in my opinion, reexamining our foreign policies - and making the requisite changes - is of the utmost importance. Again, I'm not here to defend any particular stance he is taking, but, from reading him and hearing him speaking, I think his advocacy of a non-interventionist foreign policy gets lost in his often bellicose rhetoric. From reading his books I think that is his larger point about interventionism – the idea being that we do need to see things from an outside perspective and see what the consequences of our policies are. Not knowing the man personally, I believe that if you asked him to choose between America “met[ing] out the parameterless punishment” or another country, he would undoubtedly say America. But that is also a false choice. That is why, in my opinion, reexamining our foreign policies – and making the requisite changes – is of the utmost importance. Again, I’m not here to defend any particular stance he is taking, but, from reading him and hearing him speaking, I think his advocacy of a non-interventionist foreign policy gets lost in his often bellicose rhetoric.

]]> By: matt Fay http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/01/07/mcgovern-vs-scheuer-on-the-panetta-cia-nomination/comment-page-1/#comment-166312 matt Fay Thu, 08 Jan 2009 18:53:08 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=5127#comment-166312 A.C. (last name isn't Slater, is it? - cheesy joke, I know) I'm not going to disagree with a single thing you have to say because, quite frankly, I'm with you on nearly all of those points. What I am trying to convey is what I believe Scheuer's POV is and what I've learned from reading him. I disagree with many of his views on how warfare should be conducted, but I do understand where he is coming from (I mean the man is an admirer of Lincoln and Reagan, I didn't think he would get much sympathy on this blog - myself included). I do, though, appreciate the analysis he gives on terrorism and I understand why he holds the positions he does on these issues. I think the fundamental that brings many of us who frequent Antiwar.com, and other sites like it, is a belief in a non-interventionist (or at least very limited interventionist, in some cases) foreign policy as the surest way to avoid war and maintain individual liberty. Even though we will all continue to disagree on many principles and policies, working together to achieve a "Foreign Policy of Peace and Freedom" - to borrow from Ron Paul - is a good starting point as we continue to mull over and argue the issues on which we disagree. A.C. (last name isn’t Slater, is it? – cheesy joke, I know)

I’m not going to disagree with a single thing you have to say because, quite frankly, I’m with you on nearly all of those points. What I am trying to convey is what I believe Scheuer’s POV is and what I’ve learned from reading him. I disagree with many of his views on how warfare should be conducted, but I do understand where he is coming from (I mean the man is an admirer of Lincoln and Reagan, I didn’t think he would get much sympathy on this blog – myself included). I do, though, appreciate the analysis he gives on terrorism and I understand why he holds the positions he does on these issues.

I think the fundamental that brings many of us who frequent Antiwar.com, and other sites like it, is a belief in a non-interventionist (or at least very limited interventionist, in some cases) foreign policy as the surest way to avoid war and maintain individual liberty. Even though we will all continue to disagree on many principles and policies, working together to achieve a “Foreign Policy of Peace and Freedom” – to borrow from Ron Paul – is a good starting point as we continue to mull over and argue the issues on which we disagree.

]]> By: Lear K http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/01/07/mcgovern-vs-scheuer-on-the-panetta-cia-nomination/comment-page-1/#comment-166307 Lear K Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:55:08 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=5127#comment-166307 Michael Scheuer's reasonings and justifactions ilustrates clearly the concept of American Exceptionalism where whatever the US does is right , good,and excused.While the same actions by others are evil. Michael Scheuer’s reasonings and justifactions ilustrates clearly the concept of American Exceptionalism where whatever the US does is right , good,and excused.While the same actions by others are evil.

]]>