Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bds beta 6/6/85; site pucc-i
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!pucc-j!pucc-i!afb
From: afb@pucc-i (Michael Lewis)
Newsgroups: net.college,net.politics
Subject: Re: CIA and terrorism
Message-ID: <1342@pucc-i>
Date: Thu, 6-Mar-86 08:57:31 EST
Article-I.D.: pucc-i.1342
Posted: Thu Mar  6 08:57:31 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 7-Mar-86 07:25:42 EST
References: <705@ihlpm.UUCP> <473@umich.UUCP> <1903@jhunix.UUCP> <545@whuts.UUCP> <9415@ritcv.UUCP>
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Lines: 27
Xref: watmath net.college:1196 net.politics:13722
Summary: Why are we talking about *CIA* "policies"...

In article <9415@ritcv.UUCP>, abh6509@ritcv.UUCP (A. Hudson) writes:
> 
> I don't think that protesting the CIA and its covert imperialist
> death policies will bring peace in El Salvador and Nicaragua by next
> weekend. It may, however, bring attention to its questionable policies.

     Everybody here has been talking about the CIA and *its* policies as if
William Casey was autonomous from the Executive, like he's some sort of KGB
head or something.  Do you actually believe this, or has "teflon Ron" 
discouraged you from direct attack on the source?  Don't you think the NSC
knows about and approves what the CIA is doing?  "Covert imperialist death
policies"...that's some classic rhetoric.

> I don't think that banning the CIA will appreciably limit its recruiting 
> and I certainly don't think it is going to scare off any other recruiters.
> But eventually things will change for the better.
> 
> Andrew Hudson
> rochester!ritcv!abh6509

     The only way things are going to change for the better is at the polls.
I, among many others at Purdue, interviewed with the CIA and proceeded to 
the "background check" stage before I decided it was not for me.  I would
have been a programmer...would that have made me a "covert imperialist"?
Gosh, I hope not...

     Michael Lewis @ Purdue University