Jul. 14, 2009 - So I'm a bit confused...
I've been tracking the "lies" the CIA supposedly told in developing stories in both the Wall St. Journal and NY Times.
The timing of the "lies" revelation strkes me as extremely suspect, coming as it does days before Congress tries once again to limit executive authority (Obama admin has threatened veto of that bill).
Pelosi took a beating in the spring when she accused CIA of lying and Panetta gave her a smack down. Pelosi's lies accusation came at the precise time that her waterboard witch hunt backfired as it became clear she herself was briefed early on it and apparently approved or at least was silent about it.
Reading today's NYT account, the "lie" the CIA told was in not informing Congress about a never operational program to assassinate top Al-Qaeda officials. CIA maintains no specific plans were ever put forth and helloooo, they aren't required to brief on this anyway. Al Qaeda leaders are not heads of state (these are a no no to assassinate).
Bush admin. maintains killing Al Qaeda leaders with a drone from a plane or a gun on the ground is the same thing--they are enemy combatants.
The Obama admin, btw, agrees with this position.
Does anyone feel any safer knowing Panetta killed even the musings of these ideas when he became aware of the program back in June? Do the well-coordinated Congressional Dem leaks about "lies" make anyone think the Congressional Dems have grown up at all when it comes to not playing political games with our safety?
Nope, me either. Oh well. At least we have Al Franken on the case now too. Rest easy, America.
Blessings, Holly
