Oops! Gen. Hayden busts NYT lie about Cheney.

[Navy1960]

I hope the Obama Administration and congress are stupid enough to go down this path and actually go through with this. This would be an issue unlike any other that would actually get the Republican party galvanized in a way not seen a very long time. Further, true to form as with every democratic Administration and congress the first priority is to tear apart the intelligence community in this nation which leads to tragic results. It simply amazes me that each and every democratic president from Carter to Clinton and now Obama have taken it upon themselves to gut the CIA in some way or the other and each time with tragic results. I think it's about time the democratic party realizes that intelligence gathering is not a dirty word and a whole lot of cases keeps this nation safe and to constantly tear down it's capabilities each time they are in power not only hurts this nation it causes people to lose their lives....

 

[MaggieMae]

Because it wasn't at a point yet where briefing was necessary, or required. It was only in the planning stages, not the funding ones.No, stupid. NPR never ran this story at all. This is from a NPR blogger, if you look.

We have a flesh and Blood Hayden, saying the NYT is lying (again) and all the NYT has is "two anonymous sources."

We shouldn't have a secret government.

And we shall see.

I think the reason Cheney has been so vocal lately is because he knew this and probably other things are going to come out and he's laying the ground work early.

Should have done that before invading iraq.

He was actually responding to scurrilous charges and lies aimed at him from the Obama Menstruation that had nothing to do with the CIA. THEN Queen Nan made the accusation that the CIA lied to her and Congress. THEN, after Pelosi's gaffe had pretty much gone away, the NYT goes after Cheney with "anonymous sources." Cheney's had nothing to say about that. Hasn't even dignified it with a rebuttal. We have heard from Panetta and Hayden on that. Get the timeline straight.

The "groundwork for Iraq" was laid by Dems, starting in 1998 with the Iraq Liberation Act, which made it the law of the land to remove Saddam. The first and only such legislation in our nation's history. Then for the next five years, Dems made more than 100 public statements saying we needed to stop Saddam's WMD program. All but ONE voted for the invasion, and they continued to fund it even when later they lied about their support in order to get elected/re-elected.

And dupes such as yourself still today, ignore the actual record and are mesmerized by the Booooosh demonization.

I wasn't all that upset about an invasion to get rid of Saddam Hussein and his maniacal regime, but as time went on, I felt there were several occasions where the U.S. could declared victory and withdrawn gracefully and heroically, and left the rest up to the Iraqi people to sort out. It wasn't up to us to force "democracy" on a theocracy. And that's all I'm going to say about that.

 

[sealybobo]

Because it wasn't at a point yet where briefing was necessary, or required. It was only in the planning stages, not the funding ones.No, stupid. NPR never ran this story at all. This is from a NPR blogger, if you look.

We have a flesh and Blood Hayden, saying the NYT is lying (again) and all the NYT has is "two anonymous sources."

We shouldn't have a secret government.

And we shall see.

I think the reason Cheney has been so vocal lately is because he knew this and probably other things are going to come out and he's laying the ground work early.

Should have done that before invading iraq.

He was actually responding to scurrilous charges and lies aimed at him from the Obama Menstruation that had nothing to do with the CIA. THEN Queen Nan made the accusation that the CIA lied to her and Congress. THEN, after Pelosi's gaffe had pretty much gone away, the NYT goes after Cheney with "anonymous sources." Cheney's had nothing to say about that. Hasn't even dignified it with a rebuttal. We have heard from Panetta and Hayden on that. Get the timeline straight.

The "groundwork for Iraq" was laid by Dems, starting in 1998 with the Iraq Liberation Act, which made it the law of the land to remove Saddam. The first and only such legislation in our nation's history. Then for the next five years, Dems made more than 100 public statements saying we needed to stop Saddam's WMD program. All but ONE voted for the invasion, and they continued to fund it even when later they lied about their support in order to get elected/re-elected.

And dupes such as yourself still today, ignore the actual record and are mesmerized by the Booooosh demonization.

The groundwork for Iraq was laid by Dems.

But hey, if you could spin the 2000 election to suggest it was Gore who tried to steal the election, then I guess you can make any argument for anything no matter how obsurd.

You're good.

Yes, we all know how clever

 

[MaggieMae]

I hope the Obama Administration and congress are stupid enough to go down this path and actually go through with this. This would be an issue unlike any other that would actually get the Republican party galvanized in a way not seen a very long time. Further, true to form as with every democratic Administration and congress the first priority is to tear apart the intelligence community in this nation which leads to tragic results. It simply amazes me that each and every democratic president from Carter to Clinton and now Obama have taken it upon themselves to gut the CIA in some way or the other and each time with tragic results. I think it's about time the democratic party realizes that intelligence gathering is not a dirty word and a whole lot of cases keeps this nation safe and to constantly tear down it's capabilities each time they are in power not only hurts this nation it causes people to lose their lives....

Sorry, but history has shown that the CIA has got itself in trouble all by itself. BECAUSE it is a clandestine operation, the CIA has in the past overreached a number of times, hoping no one would every discover what they'd been up to. You can go all the way back to the Wilson administration's CIA which hired two Japanese-Mexicans to try to poison Pancho Villa right up to their role in bringing down the elected government of Chile in 1973.

While I personally like the idea that there is a CIA out there protecting us from the shadows, they still must not be allowed to run amok a' la Jack Bauer.

 

[sealybobo]

I hope the Obama Administration and congress are stupid enough to go down this path and actually go through with this. This would be an issue unlike any other that would actually get the Republican party galvanized in a way not seen a very long time. Further, true to form as with every democratic Administration and congress the first priority is to tear apart the intelligence community in this nation which leads to tragic results. It simply amazes me that each and every democratic president from Carter to Clinton and now Obama have taken it upon themselves to gut the CIA in some way or the other and each time with tragic results. I think it's about time the democratic party realizes that intelligence gathering is not a dirty word and a whole lot of cases keeps this nation safe and to constantly tear down it's capabilities each time they are in power not only hurts this nation it causes people to lose their lives....

And I hope the Dems don't do shit about it and just abuse their power like Bush/Cheney did and I hope like Bush's buddies, Obama's buddies get rich in the process.

 

[Navy1960]

I hope the Obama Administration and congress are stupid enough to go down this path and actually go through with this. This would be an issue unlike any other that would actually get the Republican party galvanized in a way not seen a very long time. Further, true to form as with every democratic Administration and congress the first priority is to tear apart the intelligence community in this nation which leads to tragic results. It simply amazes me that each and every democratic president from Carter to Clinton and now Obama have taken it upon themselves to gut the CIA in some way or the other and each time with tragic results. I think it's about time the democratic party realizes that intelligence gathering is not a dirty word and a whole lot of cases keeps this nation safe and to constantly tear down it's capabilities each time they are in power not only hurts this nation it causes people to lose their lives....

Sorry, but history has shown that the CIA has got itself in trouble all by itself. BECAUSE it is a clandestine operation, the CIA has in the past overreached a number of times, hoping no one would every discover what they'd been up to. You can go all the way back to the Wilson administration's CIA which hired two Japanese-Mexicans to try to poison Pancho Villa right up to their role in bringing down the elected government of Chile in 1973.

While I personally like the idea that there is a CIA out there protecting us from the shadows, they still must not be allowed to run amok a' la Jack Bauer.

First of all the very idea that that a TV charcter is anywhere remotely close to the real thing is acutally laughable. I'm sure you are aware that the CIA didn't exist when Wilson was president Maggie, so I won't get into that with you, but am sure you were most likely speaking of the intelligence community at the time. I am in complete agreement that the intelligence community should be subject to congressional oversight. However under the NSA the Director is already tasked by congress to plan operations worldwide as seen in the paragraph previously posted. What this flap is over is that congress claims that ALL CIA operations,palnning, proposed projects, should be subject to congressional approval and oversight which the NSA has already given the Director approval to do in some cases and the CIA does on a daily basis. So then what is the real reason, the real reason is scoring political points with the base because congress and the President know they have 2 very large bills comming before congress that they need the base whipped up on at the expense of the intelligence gathering abilities of this nation which is a long held standard tactic of the previous democratic administrations. Lack of funding, investigations by previous administrations have yielded such results as the Iran Hostage crisis, Somalia, with the biggest result being 9-11. So using the intelligence community to score political points has tragic results and always does.

 

[DiveCon]

We shouldn't have a secret government.

And we shall see.

I think the reason Cheney has been so vocal lately is because he knew this and probably other things are going to come out and he's laying the ground work early.

Should have done that before invading iraq.

He was actually responding to scurrilous charges and lies aimed at him from the Obama Menstruation that had nothing to do with the CIA. THEN Queen Nan made the accusation that the CIA lied to her and Congress. THEN, after Pelosi's gaffe had pretty much gone away, the NYT goes after Cheney with "anonymous sources." Cheney's had nothing to say about that. Hasn't even dignified it with a rebuttal. We have heard from Panetta and Hayden on that. Get the timeline straight.

The "groundwork for Iraq" was laid by Dems, starting in 1998 with the Iraq Liberation Act, which made it the law of the land to remove Saddam. The first and only such legislation in our nation's history. Then for the next five years, Dems made more than 100 public statements saying we needed to stop Saddam's WMD program. All but ONE voted for the invasion, and they continued to fund it even when later they lied about their support in order to get elected/re-elected.

And dupes such as yourself still today, ignore the actual record and are mesmerized by the Booooosh demonization.

The groundwork for Iraq was laid by Dems.

But hey, if you could spin the 2000 election to suggest it was Gore who tried to steal the election, then I guess you can make any argument for anything no matter how obsurd.

You're good.

Yes, we all know how clever

since every recount showed Bush won, then it is easy to see that YES, Gore did try to "steal" that election

but since you are a fucking moron beyond belief, you will still keep with your stupid conspiracy that bush stole the 2000 and 2004 elections

 

[DiveCon]

I hope the Obama Administration and congress are stupid enough to go down this path and actually go through with this. This would be an issue unlike any other that would actually get the Republican party galvanized in a way not seen a very long time. Further, true to form as with every democratic Administration and congress the first priority is to tear apart the intelligence community in this nation which leads to tragic results. It simply amazes me that each and every democratic president from Carter to Clinton and now Obama have taken it upon themselves to gut the CIA in some way or the other and each time with tragic results. I think it's about time the democratic party realizes that intelligence gathering is not a dirty word and a whole lot of cases keeps this nation safe and to constantly tear down it's capabilities each time they are in power not only hurts this nation it causes people to lose their lives....

Sorry, but history has shown that the CIA has got itself in trouble all by itself. BECAUSE it is a clandestine operation, the CIA has in the past overreached a number of times, hoping no one would every discover what they'd been up to. You can go all the way back to the Wilson administration's CIA which hired two Japanese-Mexicans to try to poison Pancho Villa right up to their role in bringing down the elected government of Chile in 1973.

While I personally like the idea that there is a CIA out there protecting us from the shadows, they still must not be allowed to run amok a' la Jack Bauer.

First of all the very idea that that a TV charcter is anywhere remotely close to the real thing is acutally laughable. I'm sure you are aware that the CIA didn't exist when Wilson was president Maggie, so I won't get into that with you, but am sure you were most likely speaking of the intelligence community at the time. I am in complete agreement that the intelligence community should be subject to congressional oversight. However under the NSA the Director is already tasked by congress to plan operations worldwide as seen in the paragraph previously posted. What this flap is over is that congress claims that ALL CIA operations,palnning, proposed projects, should be subject to congressional approval and oversight which the NSA has already given the Director approval to do in some cases and the CIA does on a daily basis. So then what is the real reason, the real reason is scoring political points with the base because congress and the President know they have 2 very large bills comming before congress that they need the base whipped up on at the expense of the intelligence gathering abilities of this nation which is a long held standard tactic of the previous democratic administrations. Lack of funding, investigations by previous administrations have yielded such results as the Iran Hostage crisis, Somalia, with the biggest result being 9-11. So using the intelligence community to score political points has tragic results and always does.

ROFLMAO
since the CIA wasnt formed till 1947, i wonder where Maggie gets her "facts"

 

[Navy1960]

I hope the Obama Administration and congress are stupid enough to go down this path and actually go through with this. This would be an issue unlike any other that would actually get the Republican party galvanized in a way not seen a very long time. Further, true to form as with every democratic Administration and congress the first priority is to tear apart the intelligence community in this nation which leads to tragic results. It simply amazes me that each and every democratic president from Carter to Clinton and now Obama have taken it upon themselves to gut the CIA in some way or the other and each time with tragic results. I think it's about time the democratic party realizes that intelligence gathering is not a dirty word and a whole lot of cases keeps this nation safe and to constantly tear down it's capabilities each time they are in power not only hurts this nation it causes people to lose their lives....

And I hope the Dems don't do shit about it and just abuse their power like Bush/Cheney did and I hope like Bush's buddies, Obama's buddies get rich in the process.

You know sealy, contrary to most I don't care one whit about Bush or Cheney , however I don't think you have to worry much about Obama or his supporters getting wealthy. Further Obama I have said it many times while I may not agree with him on just about anything, I don't think he lacks in intelligence. So given that, I tend to agree with him when he say's that it's not a very good idea to look back at previous administrations.

 

[MaggieMae]

I hope the Obama Administration and congress are stupid enough to go down this path and actually go through with this. This would be an issue unlike any other that would actually get the Republican party galvanized in a way not seen a very long time. Further, true to form as with every democratic Administration and congress the first priority is to tear apart the intelligence community in this nation which leads to tragic results. It simply amazes me that each and every democratic president from Carter to Clinton and now Obama have taken it upon themselves to gut the CIA in some way or the other and each time with tragic results. I think it's about time the democratic party realizes that intelligence gathering is not a dirty word and a whole lot of cases keeps this nation safe and to constantly tear down it's capabilities each time they are in power not only hurts this nation it causes people to lose their lives....

Sorry, but history has shown that the CIA has got itself in trouble all by itself. BECAUSE it is a clandestine operation, the CIA has in the past overreached a number of times, hoping no one would every discover what they'd been up to. You can go all the way back to the Wilson administration's CIA which hired two Japanese-Mexicans to try to poison Pancho Villa right up to their role in bringing down the elected government of Chile in 1973.

While I personally like the idea that there is a CIA out there protecting us from the shadows, they still must not be allowed to run amok a' la Jack Bauer.

First of all the very idea that that a TV charcter is anywhere remotely close to the real thing is acutally laughable. I'm sure you are aware that the CIA didn't exist when Wilson was president Maggie, so I won't get into that with you, but am sure you were most likely speaking of the intelligence community at the time. I am in complete agreement that the intelligence community should be subject to congressional oversight. However under the NSA the Director is already tasked by congress to plan operations worldwide as seen in the paragraph previously posted. What this flap is over is that congress claims that ALL CIA operations,palnning, proposed projects, should be subject to congressional approval and oversight which the NSA has already given the Director approval to do in some cases and the CIA does on a daily basis. So then what is the real reason, the real reason is scoring political points with the base because congress and the President know they have 2 very large bills comming before congress that they need the base whipped up on at the expense of the intelligence gathering abilities of this nation which is a long held standard tactic of the previous democratic administrations. Lack of funding, investigations by previous administrations have yielded such results as the Iran Hostage crisis, Somalia, with the biggest result being 9-11. So using the intelligence community to score political points has tragic results and always does.

Those are the talking points presented by right-wing media. Don't you know the difference by now? I don't believe Barack Obama has the slightest motivation to decrease funding for the intelligence community or to even tinker once again with its channels of command. On the contrary, he now owns his own war and whataever AQ does here on out is on HIS watch. THINK!!!

Another RW talking point is that the Panetta flap was timed to create cover for Pelosi. Since that happened several weeks ago and has been off the radar, it was all but forgotten, so why on earth would even SHE want it dragged up again intentionally? No. I think Leon Panetta was ANGRY that such a program had been in development that NO ONE knew about other than a select few, AND if it had never got off the ground in the first place, why is it still around? Somebody's lying, big time, and lying needlessly. I think Panetta's concern is that something is still going on behind the scenes that those select few don't want HIM to know anything about.

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with politics. Nada, zip.

 

[MaggieMae]

Sorry, but history has shown that the CIA has got itself in trouble all by itself. BECAUSE it is a clandestine operation, the CIA has in the past overreached a number of times, hoping no one would every discover what they'd been up to. You can go all the way back to the Wilson administration's CIA which hired two Japanese-Mexicans to try to poison Pancho Villa right up to their role in bringing down the elected government of Chile in 1973.

While I personally like the idea that there is a CIA out there protecting us from the shadows, they still must not be allowed to run amok a' la Jack Bauer.

First of all the very idea that that a TV charcter is anywhere remotely close to the real thing is acutally laughable. I'm sure you are aware that the CIA didn't exist when Wilson was president Maggie, so I won't get into that with you, but am sure you were most likely speaking of the intelligence community at the time. I am in complete agreement that the intelligence community should be subject to congressional oversight. However under the NSA the Director is already tasked by congress to plan operations worldwide as seen in the paragraph previously posted. What this flap is over is that congress claims that ALL CIA operations,palnning, proposed projects, should be subject to congressional approval and oversight which the NSA has already given the Director approval to do in some cases and the CIA does on a daily basis. So then what is the real reason, the real reason is scoring political points with the base because congress and the President know they have 2 very large bills comming before congress that they need the base whipped up on at the expense of the intelligence gathering abilities of this nation which is a long held standard tactic of the previous democratic administrations. Lack of funding, investigations by previous administrations have yielded such results as the Iran Hostage crisis, Somalia, with the biggest result being 9-11. So using the intelligence community to score political points has tragic results and always does.

ROFLMAO
since the CIA wasnt formed till 1947, i wonder where Maggie gets her "facts"

The CIA was previously known as the OSS, and before that I don't know. But I'm sure Woodrow Wilson himself didn't hire anyone to knock off Pancho Villa. There has always been an intelligence arm of the government.

By the way, I get my "facts" from a lot of reading and research. You might try it sometime.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

First of all the very idea that that a TV charcter is anywhere remotely close to the real thing is acutally laughable. I'm sure you are aware that the CIA didn't exist when Wilson was president Maggie, so I won't get into that with you, but am sure you were most likely speaking of the intelligence community at the time. I am in complete agreement that the intelligence community should be subject to congressional oversight. However under the NSA the Director is already tasked by congress to plan operations worldwide as seen in the paragraph previously posted. What this flap is over is that congress claims that ALL CIA operations,palnning, proposed projects, should be subject to congressional approval and oversight which the NSA has already given the Director approval to do in some cases and the CIA does on a daily basis. So then what is the real reason, the real reason is scoring political points with the base because congress and the President know they have 2 very large bills comming before congress that they need the base whipped up on at the expense of the intelligence gathering abilities of this nation which is a long held standard tactic of the previous democratic administrations. Lack of funding, investigations by previous administrations have yielded such results as the Iran Hostage crisis, Somalia, with the biggest result being 9-11. So using the intelligence community to score political points has tragic results and always does.

ROFLMAO
since the CIA wasnt formed till 1947, i wonder where Maggie gets her "facts"

The CIA was previously known as the OSS, and before that I don't know. But I'm sure Woodrow Wilson himself didn't hire anyone to knock off Pancho Villa. There has always been an intelligence arm of the government.

By the way, I get my "facts" from a lot of reading and research. You might try it sometime.

OSS did not exist until WW2 and the CIA after that, in the early 1900's there was no such organization. You can read all you want, you wont find any such group or Government entity.

 

[MaggieMae]

ROFLMAO
since the CIA wasnt formed till 1947, i wonder where Maggie gets her "facts"

The CIA was previously known as the OSS, and before that I don't know. But I'm sure Woodrow Wilson himself didn't hire anyone to knock off Pancho Villa. There has always been an intelligence arm of the government.

By the way, I get my "facts" from a lot of reading and research. You might try it sometime.

OSS did not exist until WW2 and the CIA after that, in the early 1900's there was no such organization. You can read all you want, you wont find any such group or Government entity.

While there might not have been an "organization" that the public was aware of, espionage is as old as the country itself. This non-fiction is only one of many.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Honorable-Treachery-Intelligence-Espionage-Revolution/dp/0871134926]Amazon.com: Honorable Treachery: A History of Us Intelligence, Espionage, and Covert Action from the American Revolution to the CIA: G. J. A. O'Toole: Books[/ame]

 

[DiveCon]

The CIA was previously known as the OSS, and before that I don't know. But I'm sure Woodrow Wilson himself didn't hire anyone to knock off Pancho Villa. There has always been an intelligence arm of the government.

By the way, I get my "facts" from a lot of reading and research. You might try it sometime.

OSS did not exist until WW2 and the CIA after that, in the early 1900's there was no such organization. You can read all you want, you wont find any such group or Government entity.

While there might not have been an "organization" that the public was aware of, espionage is as old as the country itself. This non-fiction is only one of many.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Honorable-Treachery-Intelligence-Espionage-Revolution/dp/0871134926]Amazon.com: Honorable Treachery: A History of Us Intelligence, Espionage, and Covert Action from the American Revolution to the CIA: G. J. A. O'Toole: Books[/ame]

that doesnt prove shit
LOL
you were wrong, just admit it

 

[garyd]

Unforetunately Maggie there is no direct lineage to speak of between the CIA and any agency prior to the OSS. Every country since the rise of the Nation state has had intelligence operatives. They have all time to time over reached themselves and the former Soviet Union's various spy agencies of which there were several did so as often as most and were far,far more brutal and vicious than anything American's ever did.

 

[JimH52]

Oops! Gen. Hayden busts NYT lie about Cheney

So where is confirmation of this assertion or is this another fabrication?

 

[DiveCon]

Oops! Gen. Hayden busts NYT lie about Cheney

So where is confirmation of this assertion or is this another fabrication?

its in the OP, jimbo

 

[Darkwind]

Well, imagine that. But this IS NPR and as such, not really trust worthy.

Do we have a direct quote from Hayden?

NPR biased AGAINST liberals? Not likely.

Biased against the truth to be sure. Therefore, untrustworthy in all things.

 

[Darkwind]

(e) COORDINATION WITH FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS. - Under direction of the National Security Council and in a manner consistent with section 207 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 3927), the Director shall coordinate the relationships between elements of the intelligence community and the intelligence or security services of foreign governments on all matters involving intelligence-related to the national security or involving intelligence acquired through clandestine means.
National Security Act of 1947 (UNCLASSIFIED)

f) USE OF PERSONNEL. - The Director shall, in coordination with the heads of departments and agencies with elements in intelligence community, institute policies and programs within the intelligence community -

What part of that is hard to understand? While I hear democrats in congress making a lot of noise to whip up the base in order to get them behind the staggering number of dismal bills and spending that has been put up so far. If Pelosi who has on a number of occasions stuck her foot in her mouth and has proven a complete lack of ability since taking over congress in 07 along with her counterpart in the Senate goes down a path that where she and the dems in congress wish to take on previous administrations then they set a dangerous precedent that should send a message to the Obama Administration when he leaves office.

Quite right.
And this is how we keep getting the tit-for-tat politics not only from our elected leaders, but from the hacks on both sides on internet forums.

 

[Toome]

I worked with General Hayden twice during my military career. His word is good enough for me.