reply to post by ModernAcademia
Without a great deal of documentation this accusation probably is not going to gain traction outside of conspiracy theorists who seem to blame a
great deal of the world's ills on an alphabet soup of intelligence agencies. It honestly makes no sense for someone running for US president to hide
links to CIA since given the militarist nature of the United States, this might be viewed as a plus for many voters (note the presidency of George
Herbert Walker Bush a former CIA Director). As for all presidents possessing links to CIA as a perquisite of office...that seems difficult to believe
given what we know of CIA and the individuals who have been president since 1948 when the agency was founded. All one need do is read any of the
histories of CIA and its predecessor OSS to understand that until the 1980s, CIA only employed white Anglo-Saxon protestants, preferably from Ivy
League schools, as case officers. Non-white case officers existed of course but they were very much in the minority being primarily employed as
expendable assets. It seems improbable that Eisenhower, LBJ, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, and Clinton would have possessed strong links to CIA simply
because their backgrounds did not fit the profiles of case managers. A Bush 43 association is questionable because he is an ex-alcoholic and drug
user. As for Obama's CIA association...anything's possible I suppose but as indicated, a great deal of evidence for this would be required before
the notion gained any traction and I have to wonder if this information was obtainable by an ordinary citizen, why was it not exposed by the Clinton
campaign.
Bear in mind: I'm not ruling out an associations because I believe intelligence agencies regardless of which nation they represent are capable of
anything if they deem it necessary. CIA in this sense is no better or worse than MI5/MI6, Mossad/Shin Bet, KGB/FSB, DGSE, ISI,
Bundesnachrichtendienst, or MSS. It does appear that CIA is often singled out as somehow being 'worse' then the rest: It is not. The intelligence
business is ugly and that's always been the case. Yet, I seriously doubt any knowledgeable fair-minded person would argue that in a dangerous world
national security agencies aren't necessary (if they were not, why would virtually every nation on the planet have them including notably peaceable
nations such as Denmark [PET] and New Zealand [SIS]). Secrecy however, is a dangerous thing especially in a supposedly democratic society and, the
very nature of intelligence--it's secret--leaves the behavior and activities intelligence agencies subject to myriad of abuses. CIA is certainly
guilty of abuses and in the past, they have been called to task. However, anyone who suggest that CIA is any different from their competitors in the
world of intelligence is probably mistaken. In fact, they quite possibly may be less competent and less nasty that many.