Dirty Rat Bastard Of The Day: Dick Cheney
on September 11, 2012 at 11:16 am
It’s hard to point to any one thing that Dick Cheney has done to earn this award because just about every action and utterance of his is worthy of a lifetime achievement in scumbaggery but this one is pretty near the top:
(via ThinkProgress) “If President Obama were participating in his intelligence briefings on a regular basis then perhaps he would understand why people are so offended at his efforts to take sole credit for the killing of Osama bin Laden”
Holy Mother of God! You have GOT to be kidding me! Dick Cheney is accusing someone else of not paying attention to intelligence briefings? Did he forget that his entire administration ignored repeated warnings from multiple sources, including the outgoing Clinton administration, the CIA, MI6, etc., resulting in the 9/11 attacks? Did he forget that his administration ignored the intelligence briefings that indicated that the Iraq invasion would turn into a meat grinder if they didn’t plan for an insurgency? Did that all slip his mind?
No, he just didn’t give a damn because it made his Halliburton friends billions of dollars and let the GOP terrorize the country into letting America terrorize the world.
Congratulations, Dick! You’re a dirty rat bastard of unparalleled proportions!
I listened to the President’s comments on the day Seal Team Six killed Bin Laden. The President used the words “we” and “us” referring to the U.S. military and intelligence forces.
At NO time did he use the singular personal pronoun ” I ” (eye). At NO time. It’s on video … anyone can see it.
I’m getting heartily sick of the Republicans continued attempts to rewrite history.
Well, just as it’s important, I think, for a president to know when to commit U.S. forces to combat, it’s also important to know when not to commit U.S. forces to combat. I think for us to get American military personnel involved in a civil war inside Iraq would literally be a quagmire. Once we got to Baghdad, what would we do? Who would we put in power? What kind of government would we have? Would it be a Sunni government, a Shi’a government, a Kurdish government? Would it be secular, along the lines of the Ba’ath Party? Would be fundamentalist Islamic? I do not think the United States wants to have U.S. military forces accept casualties and accept the responsibility of trying to govern Iraq. I think it makes no sense at all. Did King Rat Bastard forget he said this?
“Once we got to Baghdad, what would we do? Who would we put in power? What kind of government would we have?”
Actually, there was no “we” in the equation. The Iraqi people chose their OWN government and their OWN leaders. It’s called “voting”, and the citizens had the purple thumbs to prove it. All “we” did was to show them how to construct THEIR OWN Constitution and make suggestions about how to implement it THEMSELVES.
Please tell me who “we” put into office over there, and how we managed to vote in THEIR election. I’d love to see the final number of American votes (that you seem to think exist) that were counted in the final election tallies.
Unfortunately I think the mentality that him even speaking of it means that he is taking credit comes all the way from the team that performed on that mission. Dh works with those guys and bar none they act like Obama’s the devil for not giving them all the credit. I’ve never seen an interview or print where he doesn’t give them full acollades but I think keeping their identities and occupations a secret is hard in terms of a bit of the glory that the type of person willing and able to perform those tasks inherently needs. I don’t think that’s a bad thing, just unfortunate that it means that they can’t feel the success in their work and also feel supportive of their leader.
You can bet your bottom dollar that had something gone horribly wrong at that raid, Cheney and his ilk would place all the blame on the President.
When the clock runs out on that prick’s heart, it will be a glorious day!
We know that at least one general lauded President Obama as being “one of the smartest men in the room” in briefings re Bin Laden — which means he not only was in the room, but he was paying attention! — bringing that up is a better refutation than this rant. Because rants can be dismissed as “emotional”.
Also, 9/11 should become a corollary to Godwin’s Law, even (or especially) on the anniversary. The only warning that would have helped would be a VERY SPECIFIC warning about the plan. Mere unspecific warnings of a “big plan” to “destroy the WTC” would not have sufficed. The protective agencies were probably envisioning a repeat of the first attack, and would have concentrated their efforts on screening cars in the parking garage. Looking in completely the wrong place, as it turned out.
It’s easy to forget how relatively casual airlines were with respect to hijackings back then. First of, they were uncommon, and virtually never on American soil. And then, it was mostly people who simply wanted to be taken somewhere. Cuban planes diverted to the US for people wanting to defect was a classic example. Or people trying to score a princely ransom sum. So, protections against such were minimal, and the prevailing corporate attitude was “eh, let it happen, we’ll get the plane and personnel back eventually”.
9/11 was a real “game-changer” in the truest sense of the word, because it was the FIRST time that passenger planes were used as kamikaze weapons. It retrospect, it’s pretty obvious, but until then, no-one had DARED to do so. Honestly, the intrusive TSA screenings aren’t needed; all that is truly needed is a corporate, pilot, and individual flyer commitment to NOT BE TAKEN. If potential hijackers “know” that they will be resisted, even to the point of total self-sacrifice (a la United flight 93) they won’t even try it anymore, security screenings or no!