Posted on 06/14/2009 11:53:32 AM PDT by james500
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."
Panetta told The New Yorker for an article in its June 22 issue that Cheney "smells some blood in the water" on the issue of national security.
...
Last month the former vice president offered a withering critique of Obama's policies and a defense of the Bush administration on the same day that Obama made a major speech about national security.
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."
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
I think this is just a set up to blame Cheney for the bungling of the Obama administration when the terrorists DO hit our soil...
As usual, this reveals more about the way the Liberal mind works than the Conservative.
I guess Panetta didn't get the memo. Rahm Emanuel already confessed that Libs never allow a crisis to go unexploited.
Leon Pinhead, nattering nabob.
There's a whole lot of projection goin' on out there by the loony left.
Panetta wants something to happen so BO can solidify his socialist agenda; it’ll also provide an excuse for all the extra economic downturn that Rahm and company are generating. I’m terrified of the Obama/Pelosi/Reid Patriot Act, part II
Here's the evidence:
Panetta is a pinhead.
ditto that!
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."No, the only dangerous politics is when the head of the CIA is giving interviews to elitist left-wing magazines and talking about past ELECTED officials in defamatory ways. Panetta should resign or be fired, but regardless, he's unfit for the job and dangerously incompetent.
Obviously Panetta is pre-positioning the finger he uses to point the blame at others for when the inevitable happens.
Stop covering up the documents, Panetta.
This spells real trouble. Panetta must know that security is now lacking that used to be in place. He’s setting up some kind of diversion ahead of time, so that when it happens, he can offset criticism coming from security-minded Republican, among whom Cheney is a leader.
I read it as Panetta expects an attack soon, because they’ve taken away some critical prevention tools.
Sounds rather ominous ... quick, blame the Bush admin!
Is there something looming?
While Bush was president, Leon Panetta prayed to Bill Clinton every day, prostate on the ground, for a successful attack on the White House while the entire Bush and Cheney families, great-grandchildren and all, were inside.
What? It’s not like slander or libel mean anything anymore.
Previously, the Directors of CIA avoided engaging in politics because it will taint the truth of intelligence. Of course that will never happen with Pinwheel Pinetta. (Sarcasm)
From Wikipedia:
“Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat chairwoman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, wasn’t happy with the Leon Panetta selection:
“I was not informed about the selection of Leon Panetta to be the CIA Director. I know nothing about this, other than what I’ve read. My position has consistently been that I believe the Agency is best-served by having an intelligence professional in charge at this time.”[7]
On February 12, 2009, Panetta was confirmed in the full Senate by voice vote.[8]
So many Obama appointees, so little rope.
“Maybe Feinstein has a brain after all. We know that Panetta does not”
You betcha
Senator Feinstein’s Iraq Conflict
As a member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, Sen. Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions to her husband’s firms
By Peter Byrne
IN THE November 2006 election, the voters demanded congressional ethics reform. And so, the newly appointed chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is now duly in charge of regulating the ethical behavior of her colleagues. But for many years, Feinstein has been beset by her own ethical conflict of interest, say congressional ethics experts.
As chairperson and ranking member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee (MILCON) from 2001 through the end of 2005, Feinstein supervised the appropriation of billions of dollars a year for specific military construction projects. Two defense contractors whose interests were largely controlled by her husband, financier Richard C. Blum, benefited from decisions made by Feinstein as leader of this powerful subcommittee.
http://www.bohemian.com/metro/01.24.07/dianne-feinstein-0704.html#
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.