At the time I read the article and voted in the poll, 126,797 had voted and 61% said they agreed with Panetta.
http://news.aol.com/article/cia-pan...ews.aol.com/article/cia-panetta-cheney/526446
CIA Head Slams Cheney for Comments
Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by Crabtownboy, Jun 15, 2009.
?
What is your opinion on this one?
Poll closed Jul 5, 2009.
-
I agree with Panetta
3 vote(s)23.1% -
I disagree with Panetta
10 vote(s)76.9% -
I have mixed emotions on this one
0 vote(s)0.0%
-
Crabtownboy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Your quote appears at the beginning of the article.
Further in the article the same quote is repeated - only it is slightly different.
Panetta said of Cheney's remarks: "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."
Why do you think that the author of your article would start off with an editorialized quote rather than the actual quote?
You will notice that Panetta admits that he has to "read behind" Cheney's remarks to come up with his conclusion.
In other words Panetta is confessing to his spin even as he is spinning it.
As crabboy likes to say - "Interesting". -
Seems by the comments made by many dems that they wanted us to fail in Iraq to make a point. And, oh how they cried when the charge was leveled. Now that the shoe is on the other foot they are using the same argument. Go figure!!
-
Crabtownboy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
The truth hurts doesn't it Crabby? And, no I do not agree with the libby in charge of the CIA.
-
Crabtownboy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Do you agree with Panetta? Why or why not? -
I'll address the OP. So what?
-
If he thinks the Obama policy changes are opening the U. S. for attacks,
what would be more patriotic:
A. to be silent and let the attack happen
B. to be vocal and attempt to change policy
I think his vocal attacks are because he cares.
In his criticism of a sitting President, he's merely following the lead of Carter, Gore and Clinton who regularly blasted Bush.
Rob -
Perhaps we need to get Pannetta on this forum with crabtownboy; JC or Freedom, whichever; MP; and all those with a yearning for "bo". -
I answered the question just as I answered the poll. NO!!!! Ok, is that simple enough for you? As for answering why. What's the point in trying to explain anything to you. Your liberal mind is already made up.
-
Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>Site Supporter
Why should we believe anything the C.I.A. says, didn't Pelosi say they were a bunch of liars ?
-
Personally, I've a feeling another 'chaotic' event is being planned and we're being primed for the event in various ways..... propagandized both with distraction and with the staging of a unspecified anxiety over many ....... what should be relatively 'non-issue happenings' ......to prepare us to make and accept the 'proper response' ....when it happens(whatever 'it ' may be).
Will it be more solid that the 9-11 event? Who knows? It could be a false flag.... or just as ambiguious as 9-11.... but just as specific in targeting the next move on the international scene as well as the next move in justifying greater control and suspicion of our country's own citizens!
(I heard there was already a 'covert' operation regarding a hypothetical nuclear event occurring in NY. Whether this was state or city.... I don't know.... and haven't any links to prove it..... but I do get suspicious anymore when I hear of 'operations' although I also believe that exercises for possible disaster senarios help to train rescue, medical, police, and even military for disasterous events.... and reveal problems in response and communications which may be corrected before such a need is for real...... thus protecting us. At 9-11, NORAD, was having such a exercise: When the bombings took place in England..... the Brits were also staging an exercise which so parallelled the terrorism..... that it is like there was EITHER a cordination of events.... so that it was staged OR that there were leaks from the planned exercise to terrorist sources.... which took opportunity of the exercise to stage a real event.) -
Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>Site Supporter
-
Have you ever considered participating in one of them other than to tell others that they are off topic?
Why haven't you told us whether you agree with Panetta?
Do you agree with Panetta that Cheney wants people to die in a terrorist attack just to prove his point that Obama is making us less safe? -
The CIA needs to be slamming Nancy Pelosi. She is the one who is endangering our troops by pushing to have photos released. She is the one who stated that the CIA lied about her having been breifed.
Dick Cheney is old news. He might be speaking out more vocally than he did as Vice President. I find him respectable. Regardless, he is no longer in a position of power. People need to get over him & move on. -
Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>Site Supporter
Seems like the CIA is backing off on statements about Mr. Vader....
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...-believe-cheney-rooting-for-terrorist-attack/ -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
From Curtis' article
-
I think the government just likes emergencies. We always consent to giving it more money, more power and more control over us during emergencies. Isn't that what all governments want?