by Pat Darnell
1) Dick Cheney -- While VP Dick Cheney is undecided on whether to have a heart transplant or not, his name comes to mind as a likely candidate. The Al Qaeda network needs his leadership. As he still holds to the idea that "Ever since Obama entered the White House, the former vice president has been decrying him as a weak leader whose actions place the nation at risk." While Cheney also holds the fort on the means to bin Laden's demise was his formidable torture techniques at Gitmo.
There could be no better candidate than the former Haliburton CEO. He probably knows every vendor in the world. Yes he could bring credibility to the daft organization of terror cells of the al Qaeda.
" ... But let's roll the tape. In 2009, after Obama was in office less than a month, Cheney told Politico that there was a "high probability" that terrorists would attempt a nuclear or biological attack in the coming years and that, thanks to Obama's policies, the odds were better that such an assault would succeed. He also said, "When we get people who are more concerned about reading the rights to an Al Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are absolutely committed to do anything they can to kill Americans, then I worry."You see, Dick Cheney wants someone to nuke someone ... and he wants someone to make a biological attack out there. It is almost a marriage in heaven, because Cheney could take over the al Qaeda leadership, send out some of those kinds of attacks himself, and die early from his heart condition, not having to face the consequences of his acts. It's a perfect short term solution for the rudderless terrorists since bin Laden's trip to the bottom of the sea.
2) Donald Rumsfeld -- "Chicago-born Rumseld, 78, has been a college wrestler, Navy pilot, congressman, chief of staff to another president (Ford); a go-to guy for special missions from presidents Nixon and Reagan; and CEO for eight years of a big pharmaceutical company (Searle).
He spreads some blame around for reverses in Iraq (big beef: intelligence errors) but he's no back-biter and fesses up to his own misses.
On the big question, though, whether the Iraq war was "worth the costs," no retreat. The Middle East would be "far more perilous," he says, if dictator Saddam Hussein had been allowed to stay in power.
Donald Rumsfeld has flip-flopped on torture! Monday (May 2, 2011)he told Newsmax (a site of no credibility, but Rumsfeld didn't deny giving the interview):
" ... First of all, no one was waterboarded at Guantanamo Bay. That’s a myth that's been perpetrated around the country by critics. The United States Department of Defense did not do waterboarding for interrogation purposes to anyone. It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding."But Monday night (May 2, 2011) he told buddy Sean Hannity:
" ... I’m told there was some confusion today on some programs…suggesting that I indicated that no one who was waterboarded at Guantanamo provided any information on this. That’s just not true. What I said was no one was waterboarded at Guantanamo by the U.S. military…Three people were waterboarded by the CIA…and then later brought to Guantanamo. In fact, as you point out, the information that came from those individuals was critically important. ... (Walsh, Joan. May 4, 2011. Read entire article HERE )"Rumsfeld just wants the "last word," God love him.
*
*
*
No comments:
Post a Comment