Daily Mail: Enough politics with national security May 21, 2009
Following the attack by terrorists on the United States on Sept. 11, 2001, many Americans questioned why the government was caught off guard.
A few people suggested that the president should sack George Tenet as director of the Central Intelligence Agency. After all, President Clinton had appointed him.
President Bush realized that the last thing the CIA needed was turmoil at the top. He kept Tenet on so that the agency could concentrate on the task at hand. Gathering information was the priority, not political considerations.
Harsh interrogation methods were approved, and CIA officials explained them to about 40 congressional leaders, including the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Nancy Pelosi.
Nearly eight years later, the nation has been spared a second attack, although terrorists are active across the globe, including Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia and many other places.
Democrats control both houses of Congress and the White House. Some highly partisan Democrats, led by Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, want to punish the previous administration for approving harsh interrogation methods.
But Pelosi, now speaker of the House, and other Democratic congressional leaders were briefed on these matters.
Rather than admit she knew, Pelosi tried last week to say she was not briefed. When the record showed otherwise, Pelosi said CIA officials misled her.
This drew a rebuke from a fellow California Democrat, Leon Panetta. The two had served in Congress together, and he now heads the CIA. In a memo to agency employees, Panetta said:
“There is a long tradition in Washington of making political hay out of our business. It predates my service with this great institution, and it will be around long after I’m gone. But the political debates about interrogation reached a new decibel level . . . when the CIA was accused of misleading Congress.”
Panetta went on to encourage CIA staff to “ignore the noise and stay focused on your mission. We have too much work to do to be distracted from our job of protecting this country.”
That’s getting to the heart of the matter. Pelosi’s scurrilous attempt to smear the Bush administration by demonizing the CIA is just that - noise.
Congress should devote no time to political blame games.
download the eagles eagles Super Sucker release
Democrats are now responsible for national security, a much more important undertaking.
-->
Loading...
11 Responses to “Daily Mail: Enough politics with national security”
Indeed. The modern day Democrat party are Machiavellian through and through. Nothing and no one is to be spared in their quest for power, including national security. Any time they can bash George W. Bush, they will, and what’s at stake simply does not matter to them.
Liberal Democrats are the true totalitarians of the modern era. If you disagree with them, you are to be silenced either by law, by shame, or in the case of Wanda Sykes and her view of Rush Limbaugh, by death.
I hope the Obamabots are happy with their risky, dangerous, irresponsible choice made last November. May God help this nation.
B.K.
Democrats are not alone in their critique of “dubya”. Any President who experiences a 23% approval rating over the waning months of a secod term in office pretty well speaks for itself. History won’t need to wait to judge his Presidency … I believe that has been well stated already.
Republicans (particularly those on the outer fringes of the “right”) are even becoming an embarrassment to their own party. The entire party’s message is disjointed and incoherent. As the Gazette (I know, I know, a “liberal rag”) pointed out in this morning’s editorial, the shifting demographics to the Democratic Party cannot be denied.
Even today’s telecast of Cheney’s defense of the Bush Administration’s “war on terror” and the illegal techniques used to obtain information was pathetic. He can attempt to put lipstick on that pig but it’s still a pig.
Here’s a man (detested by most Americans), who cannot even go away gracefully. It was a sad swansong to an admintration’s failed policy on subverting terrorism within any reasonable definition of a legal framework. If only he could view himself as do the vast majority of Americans perhaps he would retire to WY with a fishing rod (please not a gun) in hand.
Truth be told, I believe “thinking Republicans” wish that Obama had been their candidate.
Well, “thinking Republicans” are we conservative Republicans, and I can tell you now that given what he believes I wouldn’t have voted for Obama if he was a Republican.
I love how you judge an entire Presidency based on polls. Sure, with the constant bashing of Bush in the media and in our culture, it’s no wonder he had a low approval rating.
You liberals are so insistent that waterboarding is torture when any common sense examination of the procedure dictates that it is not. Basically the Bush administration kept you and our country safe for nearly 8 years, yet you insist on attacking it for doing just that. What gall!
Dick Cheney is speaking out because he cares about this country and doesn’t want to see it torn to shreds financially, around the world, morally, and culturally by your President. Since the spineless Congressional Republicans won’t speak out, I guess he figures someone must.
Just for the sake of the argument, JTG, what if Cheney’s warnings turn out to be right? What if there is another attack on American soil that kills millions of Americans? Will you find some illogical, irrational way to blame that on Bush & Cheney too? Or will you wake up, realize that your President’s policies are putting this nation in grave danger, and rethink your vote in 2008?
JTG, the bottom line is this: I am confident that when your President does enough damage to the country enough people will wake up in 2010 to elect a Congress that will stop him from doing more. I’m not sure why you so adamantly oppose fiscal responsibility, low taxes, and a strong defense, but you obviously do because you support a President whose polices are based completely different principles.
…and when the Republican party starts taking advice from the likes of The Gazette and Colin Powell that will indeed be the final nail in its coffin.
I cannot help it that you refuse to see Bush as the incompetent President he was. I also cannot help it if you continue to refute what growing numbers came to realize as his time in office grew in to endless days, weeks, months and years.
I suppose what I find most astonishing is that those of you who see him otherwise, are apparently incapable of judging him objectively.
I believe George W. Bush was a pleasant man and an honorable man but a leader he was not … certainly not an intelligent one. Take a moment and read about Bob Woodward’s interviews with Paul O’Neill (Dubya’s 1st Sec. of Treasury) and Gale Norton (his 1st Sec. of Interior). They were both aghast at dubya’s seemingly difficult time grasping the issues at hand.
As for Cheney’s warnings turning out to be right … again this is your party’s strongest trait, i.e. instilling fear. Do you truly believe that one man / one administration can guarantee (w/o question) that our nation will remain completely safe from attack 100% of the time? I applaud his administration for eight relatively safe years following 9/11 but that is the responsibility of the President … to protect and defend. We do have porous borders so yes, it is possible that another attack could occur no matter who resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. So I consider that to be a weak argument you put forth. I would not hold Bush or Obama or whomever entirely responsible if an attack would happen. That is a burden that no one man or administration can carry alone.
Your right about polls, they do not tell the whole story but they are one of the better indicators of what or who is working well and what or who isn’t. I suppose it boils down to where the numbers fall as they relate to whoever’s in office and how one’s personal biases influence one’s perception of those numbers.
Obama is not going to hit a home run on every issue he tackles but so far, most folks seem to be impressed with the performance of his administration … just look at the polls (oh excuse me, I shouldn’t cite them).
As for your thoughts about “the likes of Colin Powell” well I suppose he was okay in your book before he had the common sense to endorse Obama. Powell himself stated he didn’t like the direction the Republican Party was heading in and he appears to one of hundreds of thousands that feel the same as they changed party affiliation from Red to Blue.
B.K. I feel certain you are a fine person but your blind allegiance to the many failed policies related to George W. Bush’s time in office reminds me of those poor lemmings that follow their leader over the edge of the precipice. In reality, Cheney was likely the “power behind the throne” and because of his counsel to the President, we’re still paying for the mess that was created.
Obama, unfortunately, now has to spend valuable time just trying to put the toothpaste back into the tube. Thank God we now have a man with true leadership skills and a penchant for accomplishing things. Now, lets all get behind the President and push for universal health care / single payer refom.
That would be funny if it weren’t so sad (and scary).
Guess I’ve been on the outer fringes since I supported Goldwater in 1964. I was one year away from being old enough to vote. but well remember the abuse and name-calling I received as I sat quietly in class at WVU. I was again on the fringes when I enthusiastically voted twice for Ronald Wilson Reagan.
I was very pleased w/ George W., except when he sided w/ Democrats on spending, education, illegal immigration, etc. At least we had an adult in the White House–and in the Vice President’s position. AND he took his oath of office to protect us from enemies very seriously.
I am growing just a wee bit weary of the predictable name-calling from those on the left. What a bunch of babies. When you don’t get your way (and even when you DO get your way)you whine and moan that not everyone agrees w/ you. Then you resort to shrill name-calling and threats to shut up anyone who might cause you to have to consider your failed feel-good ideas. ANYTHING to mask the fact that you have no substantive arguments and no facts w/ which to back up your incessant whining.
You can only mouth the bias of the main-stream media and left-wing kook blogs. AND that was done for 8 years until it became “convential wisdom”. The thing about “conventional wisdom” is that there is no wisdom and no truth associated.
If terrorists come a-calling, I will be only too happy to direct them to houses occupied by those who through a lifetime of hand-wringing guilt cannot stand the thought of being protected. Actually you should start your own list for terrorists to find you. Would not that be a noble thing for you who hate this country and those who protect it SO much???
And here is a bit of red meat to send you into a feeding frenzy. I am and have been such a fan of Dick Cheney. Sarah Palin rocks–she is conservative, speaks her well-honed mind, does not float w/ the tides and is tough. And to boot she is beautiful. That in itself is enough to drive women on the left nuts (but it is a short trip). Bobby Jindal has turned Louisiana in the right direction is such a short period of time. Of course the left has to try to destroy him also.
To you on the left. You care about nothing except power over others’ lives. To you it is an addiction more powerful than cocaine, heroin or meth. You will do anything for it, sacrifice anyone for it and will never be satisfied. No lie is too outrageous in your quest to destroy all who dare to disagree. And as I’ve seen in West Virginia, no misery is too great to inflict on the citizens (miserable education and lack of prosperity) generation after generation in order to keep them a beaten down voting block to give you endless power. Shame on you for such self-indulgent behavior that keeps a population in perpetual hopelessness.
You can (and will) call me names all day long and think of ways to shut me up, but it is you who have no rudder to your lives. It is you who have neither thoughts nor ideas which actually work and make any sense. So I proudly stand “on the fringes”.
JTG with your blind admiration for a person that has never,(NEVER) accomplished a single thing. He swooned the ignorant to follow him,you are not in aposition to judge anyone.
You are bloviating and should keep your thoughts pithy!
Whew, Joanie dear … a little hot under the collar today huh? It may seem a bit strange to you but I believe most of us to the “left” would characterize those of you to the “right” using pretty much the identical language you used … except, of course, we definitely see Cheney & Palin in a much different light. So I suppose this is stalemate. If anything, I see those to the “right” as being “whiners extraordinaire”. John Boehner fits that category nicely.
What you folks continue to gloss over and have apparently reached complete denial is that the results of this past election spoke resoundingly to the fact that Americans were sick and tired of the failed administration of “dubya”. This doesn’t mean that there haven’t been productive Republican administrations in the past but as for “George’s cabal” and the constant “tweaking” of our Constitution to justify their actions … ENOUGH!!!
Olfrt — as to my “blind admiration for a person that has (NEVER) accomplished a single thing …”, your bar for reasonable expectations from one who essentially governed over a disappointing eight years has been set too low for too long. Wake-up and get a real taste of what significant and positive change is. Turn off Fox Noise and make a more objective assessment of the current administration.
I remain astonished at how the left continues to insist that the Bush administration “tweaked” the Constitution to justify it’s actions, but see absolutely nothing wrong with the blatant unconstitutional behavior of the current administration. I mean, the framers of the Constitution never dreamed we’d have a President who would take over entire segments of private industries or spend trillions of dollars of money that does not exist in an effort to “boost the economy” that will surely fail.
The Bush administration correctly believed that American constitutional rights are not afforded to foreign nationals. We owe them nothing.
..and to Joan, that was a brilliant and eloquent post. Amen.
BK would a objective assessment of the current administration include that we are now several TRILLION dollars in debt. The resulting action of this empty suit will be an increase in yours and my taxes,not to mention the debt he has placed on every citizen for the extended future?
The answer is “no” to your objective assessment query. You see my dear Olfert, those of you who cling to the extreme fringe of the “rightwing” are really not relevant anymore. Oh, by all means, I encourage you to bond closely and feed of of each others myopic assessment of this administration lack of performance (as you perceive it to be)because the rest of us (some 65% of us based on May’s polling) like what we see. You have suffered through eight years of “Bush inertia” so I can see how you would have difficulty recognizing forward momentum and substantive progress.
So please continue to worship at the feet of the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, Newt Gingrich, Bill O’Reilly and their ilk because that suits us fine. And while you’re at it, please continue to attack Sonia Sotamayor (on the grounds of reverse racism or whatever other perverse argument you choose) because we again enjoy watching such stalwarts as Rush and Newt bring more disharmony to the already disheleved remnants of the Republican Party. Bet you guys count on scoring big with Hispanics during the 2010 Congressional races huh?
Can’t wait to see what your tomorrow’s argument du jour will be. Looks like you’ve definitely got your hand on the self-destruct button.