CIA head says Cheney almost wishing US be attacked - Yahoo! News »
Posted By not2needy 4 months, 3 weeks ago in News
WASHINGTON – CIA Director Leon Panetta says former Vice President Dick Cheney's criticism of the Obama administration's approach to terrorism almost suggests "he's wishing that this country would be attacked again, in order to make his point."
Read Full Story at news.yahoo.com »
1368 Views Share Story 91 Comments Report
Submitted By:
not2needy
Hi And Welcome
I am a Christian, Wife, Mother of one son, Liberal, and retired social worker. I enjoy my computer, gardening, reading, cooking and ...
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 91 (view all)
-
77%
not2needy4 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
Panetta said of Cheney's remarks: "It's almost, a little bit, gallows politics. When you read behind it, it's almost as if he's wishing that this country would be attacked again, in order to make his point. I think that's dangerous politics."
Darn tootin it's dangerous.. Who knows? If Cheney wants it to happen bad enough, he just may be able to orchestrate it.. He's a scary old toad!-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned4 Replies
-
-
-
83%
Spadecaller4 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Cheney's message is coming through loud and clear; (I'll show you what happens when you stop torturing people as we had to do...)
Reply
Though George Bush insisted, “Haven’t seen it; we don’t torture.”
Hmm...awfully strange. The puppet speaks without its master present. -
-
-
-
89%
Ciera-Marie4 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You can say that again will. So his wife but she's a different topic. It doesn't surprise me that Dick not only thinks that, believes that and has said it. Nothing he says or does surprises me. I don't trust him never have. From his Reagan and Bush the first years to his years with W.
Reply
-
-
-
7%
lloydm654 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes and the democrats begged for another 9/11,they screamed for six long years for it.When it didn't happen they had to start a pile of crap that smells almost as bad as this administration.The more Obama slips toward his demise,the louder the beggars,and the loser moan,and grown,and it is music to my ears.
Reply-
-
-
-
100%
fiftynine4 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Yes and the democrats begged for another 9/11,they screamed for six long years for it."...
Reply
That comment was enough for me and most rational people to see that you are a moron....
The comment of Obama's demise,even though his approval ratings are good in both party's,shows that not only are you not to bright but that you also have problems with reality...Go play in the traffic please... -
-
Neutral
dunkirk4 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
No the dems didnt beg for an attaack, that was usually the response of hte righties to the Dems pointing out Bush was inept on terrorism. I guess if you repeat it enough you believe it right?
Reply
Lets look at the early days of Bush prior to 9/11. Clinton had warned Bush of terrorist threats and Bush went on vacation. All during the Clinton years the REPUBLICAN congress stonewalled Clinton on fighting terrorism claiming it wasnt as big a deal as he claimed it to be that there were more importnat things to deal with (hmmmmm a bj was way more important that stopping terrorists in their way of thinking). When Bush took office he outline 15 key items his administration was going to deal with, fighting terrorism wasnt in that list, The most important thing Star Wars from RayGun. The end result 9/11. The terrorists may have planned it during Clintons term (biut then again with all the stonewalling by the REPUBLICANS they could have done the planning by actually renting office space there and studying the buildings design internally) they needed Bush to actually do it.,
-
-
-
22%
ssfahrer4 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Mr. Panetta is so UNQUALIFIED to run the CIA, that he doesn't even realize that the organization he runs is in the DISINFORMATION business. Whether it's briefing Congress people (including Nancy Pelosi), or trying to get rid of leaders THEY don't like, the CIA says one thing about its activities, and does another. It's all disinformation = LIES. Doesn't he get it?
Reply
And BTW, I've been surprised that the REAL perpetrators of 9/11 (with ties to Israel, NOT Saudi Arabia, BTW) haven't struck since 2001. What are the REAL terrorists (who are/were NOT Arabs) waiting for????-
0%
tanglang4 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
WHOA!!! Three or four weeks ago every one of you people that negged this guy would have been cheering for this comment. Look at where he said that the CIA lied to Pelosi. How many of you folks that negged this were saying the same thing a couple weeks ago?
Reply
-
-
23%
Firststarwatcher4 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree with libsRfunny. Cheney's comments in no way suggest that he wished the US would be attacked. Panetta is a buffon and is just making comments like this because he is being interviewed for a magazine. He should be investigated, have his background really loked at, to see what in the heck qualifies him to be the head of the CIA. When Bush was head of the CIA, we weren't attacked, and if the justice deparpartment did not stop Clinton from bombing Osama Bin Laden's camp because a Saudi prince's Plane was discovered near the camp (one of the princes was visiting Bin Laden on a hunting trip) the towers would still be standing, and these terrorist creeps would not have the guts to even try a stunt like 9-11. Now we have an inexperienced president who is going to end up putting us into even a bigger war than we are in now. And for the person who commented on Cheney's company making money on the war, I don't see this president putting any constraints on the oil industry to come up with alternative energy within an impossible time frame.
Reply -
0%
heatseek14 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I hope the ******* with the laundry on their heads attack Leon Penatta and all the democratics right in shorts. What a terrible thing to say. This ****head should have been in one of the Twin Towers on 9/11. **** him. HEAR ME LEON PANETTA? **** YOU!
Reply -
78%
lfergie8124 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Of course he is wishing for another attack. It would push sentiment to his side and make his actions seem justified. The only problem is the lies he has told about torture keeping America safe. It seems that, according to Senator Levin, there is nothing in the reports that prove that torture got information that prevented an attack. It was proven before and proven after that torture does not work because the person will say whatever you want to get the torture to stop.
Reply
It did serve one purpose though. They got some captives to lie about Iraq's WMD capability so Bush/Cheney would have false information to to sway congress to give them authorization to use force against Iraq.-
86%
Dave594 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Mostly I think you are correct about that. He may not be actively wishing for an attack but it would, at least from Cheney's point of view, justify the unlawful actions taken by the Bush administration. I have watched him on quite a few shows and have heard him say things I know are not true because even when they happened several years ago there were reports to the contrary at the time. On that comes to mind is that there was no evidence that terrorists would use aircraft as suicide bombers. There was good evidence at the time of the attacks, Sept 2001, from a report that dated to Sept 1999. The information was there. the warnings were passed on to the white House. They were either discounted or ignored. To what purpose I do not know. For Cheney to claim they had no idea this could happen is either stupid beyond all belief or an out right lie. The bush administration started rear end covering even that early on so why would Cheney stop now? This has nothing to do with the safety of the United States and has much to do with what will keep Cheney safe from all of his imagined bogey men. Of course the real bogey man for Cheney might just be a jail cell at some point.
Reply
-
-
75%
orndorffter4 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
N2n, good story and yes if he says something like that, who says that he cant have it done again? Cheney is a very evil man without a heart and could care less about This ciuntry or the People. a very cold hearted man who well do what ever it takes to get what he wants. thanks for sharing.
Reply-
33%
BB644 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You guys are a little whacked. Cheney isn't the force of evil you keep claiming. First he's out of office. If he was evil, he'd be in the White House now and Obama would be some street waling protester. Get real. It's fine if you dislike him but give it up, the man is out of office, rather than attacking him, tell me the great things your president is doing.
Reply
-
-
-
29%
BB644 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Oh brother. A political hack commenting on another political hack.... Cheney has a point when it comes to some battle front info we've been hearing. If you take a prisoner, you're ordered to Marandize them. Battlefield and the President orders their rights to be read... We're also seeing some security measures being reduces on the borders. It will become a question of when we're attacked again, not if. I hope and pray it doesn't and that the FBI and other agencies can stop them. But when it happens again, blame must be laid at the feet of the terrorists, their support networks and the people that reduced security and let it happen, President Obama.
Reply-
80%
fiftynine4 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"But when it happens again, blame must be laid at the feet of the terrorists, their support networks and the people that reduced security and let it happen........"bushboy did what to secure our borders in the eight years he had ??? He did what to secure our ports in the eight years he had ?
Reply
You are right ..when the next terror attack occurs it should be laid right at the feet of those responsible...bushboy and cheney....just like the first one that they ignored the warnings about.
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
tanglang4 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Let's see here DJ. Panetta was Clintons COS at the time Clinton was saying Iraq had WMD right? So does that mean that he too was wrong about Iraq? Now Obama has him in charge of the CIA.
Reply
And Hillary was advocating the removal of Saddam from 1998-2003 yet now she is our SOS appointed by Obama. What does this say about him???
-
More News
LA Times
A story of shock, chaos and bravery unfolds in Ft. Hood shooting
Historic healthcare overhaul passes House
Afghanistan government says foreign officials are interfering
Unemployment rate rises above 10% ; Obama signs jobless benefit extension
Jason Rodriguez : Shooting at downtown Orlando office building leaves 5 hurt, 1 dead
Submit a Story
Advertisement
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.