The only ones who got fooled - and deliberately so under the evil, sick aegis and direction of one Richard B. Cheney, who had Bush firmly by the nose - were the American people; I can hardly bear to think how different everything would be if those planes had never been flown into those buildings.  Would we have gone to war?  Would we have a Patriot Act or be living in a surveillance state?  Would Bush have even gotten a second term?

The death and destruction - physical, moral, economic, political, personal - that emanated from those attacks is incalculable, both here and in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I don't know if there is a more offensive statement that could have been offered today than Dick Cheney's.  Imagine being so evil that one could be consumed with jealousy that those responsible for the lies, the crimes committed against humanity, the war waged for nearly a decade, and the erosion of constitutional rights aren't getting the credit they deserve.  Be happy if not being able to imagine that is a bridge too far for you - it means you're human.

Cheney - among others - should be in a prison cell; rather than sniping at Obama for not getting credit, he should be thanking him for deciding that no one will be held accountable for the actions of the Bush administration.

This is so absurd.  I rank it with the Swiftboating of John Kerry and myriad other assaults by these absolutely terrible people.

From the creator of Family Guy...

Dick Cheney, one of the most disgraceful and despicable men ever to hold government office.

The latest is Bradley Manning. His crime: releasing a video exposing a US Apache helicopter shooting and killing civilians and journalists in Baghdad.

But Cheney and Bush?

No.

Don't tell me about how despicable Cheney is.
Or Bush for that matter.
I know about that.

What I want to know is why Cheney and Bush are considered above the law, and why the Obama administration, on behalf of the American people, does not hold them to account for their actions.

Dick Cheney, one of the most disgraceful and despicable men ever to hold government office.

RICHARD Clark.... Um, the first point, I think the overall point is, there was no plan on Al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration.

Second point is that the Clinton administration had a strategy in place, effectively dating from 1998. And there were a number of issues on the table since 1998.And they remained on the table when that administration went out of office -- issues like aiding the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, changing our Pakistan policy -- uh, changing our policy toward Uzbekistan. And in January 2001, the incoming Bush administration was briefed on the existing strategy. They were also briefed on these series of issues that had not been decided on in a couple of years.

What this shows is that Clinton had let three very important issues slide for two years. You have to wonder if Clinton had supported the Northern Alliance in its fight with the Taliban would OBL ever been able to be in Afghanistan in the first place?

And the third point is the Bush administration decided then, you know, in late January, to do two things. One, vigorously pursue the existing policy, including all of the lethal covert action findings, which we've now made public to some extent.

This shows that the claim that Bush didn't immediately go after OBL to be a complete fiction.

So, point five, that process which was initiated in the first week in February, uh, decided in principle, uh in the spring to add to the existing Clinton strategy and to increase CIA resources, for example, for covert action, five-fold, to go after Al Qaeda.

Again we see Bush taking action. Just days of him becoming President he decided to increase the CIA's resources 500%.

Let's review.

(Angle)QUESTION: What is your response to the suggestion in the [Aug. 12, 2002] Time [magazine] article that the Bush administration was unwilling to take on board the suggestions made in the Clinton administration because of animus against the -- general animus against the foreign policy?

CLARKE:I think if there was a general animus that clouded their vision, they might not have kept the same guy dealing with terrorism issue. This is the one issue where the National Security Council leadership decided continuity was important and kept the same guy around, the same team in place. That doesn't sound like animus against uh the previous team to me.

JIM ANGLE: You're saying that the Bush administration did not stop anything that the Clinton administration was doing while it was making these decisions, and by the end of the summer had increased money for covert action five-fold. Is that correct?

CLARKE: All of that's correct.

Link

Now, let's just forget about the fact that in the May time frame we had an international incident with Communist China. Our leaders must be able to focus on several things at once.

What did this ramped up activity yield in the way of intelligence? Let's look at another interview. This time with Condi Rice, Bush's NSA. The subject is a meeting on July 5, 2001.

"At the special meeting on July 5 were the FBI, Secret Service, FAA, Customs, Coast Guard, and Immigration. We told them that we thought a spectacular al Qaeda terrorist attack was coming in the near future." That had been had been George Tenet's language. "We asked that they take special measures to increase security and surveillance. Thus, the White House did ensure that domestic law enforcement including the FAA knew that the CSG believed that a major al Qaeda attack was coming, and it could be in the U.S., and did ask that special measures be taken."

RICHARD Clark.... Um, the first point, I think the overall point is, there was no plan on Al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration.

Second point is that the Clinton administration had a strategy in place, effectively dating from 1998. And there were a number of issues on the table since 1998.And they remained on the table when that administration went out of office -- issues like aiding the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, changing our Pakistan policy -- uh, changing our policy toward Uzbekistan. And in January 2001, the incoming Bush administration was briefed on the existing strategy. They were also briefed on these series of issues that had not been decided on in a couple of years.

What this shows is that Clinton had let three very important issues slide for two years. You have to wonder if Clinton had supported the Northern Alliance in its fight with the Taliban would OBL ever been able to be in Afghanistan in the first place?

And the third point is the Bush administration decided then, you know, in late January, to do two things. One, vigorously pursue the existing policy, including all of the lethal covert action findings, which we've now made public to some extent.

This shows that the claim that Bush didn't immediately go after OBL to be a complete fiction.

So, point five, that process which was initiated in the first week in February, uh, decided in principle, uh in the spring to add to the existing Clinton strategy and to increase CIA resources, for example, for covert action, five-fold, to go after Al Qaeda.

Again we see Bush taking action. Just days of him becoming President he decided to increase the CIA's resources 500%.

Let's review.

(Angle)QUESTION: What is your response to the suggestion in the [Aug. 12, 2002] Time [magazine] article that the Bush administration was unwilling to take on board the suggestions made in the Clinton administration because of animus against the -- general animus against the foreign policy?

CLARKE:I think if there was a general animus that clouded their vision, they might not have kept the same guy dealing with terrorism issue. This is the one issue where the National Security Council leadership decided continuity was important and kept the same guy around, the same team in place. That doesn't sound like animus against uh the previous team to me.

JIM ANGLE: You're saying that the Bush administration did not stop anything that the Clinton administration was doing while it was making these decisions, and by the end of the summer had increased money for covert action five-fold. Is that correct?

CLARKE: All of that's correct.

Link

Now, let's just forget about the fact that in the May time frame we had an international incident with Communist China. Our leaders must be able to focus on several things at once.

What did this ramped up activity yield in the way of intelligence? Let's look at another interview. This time with Condi Rice, Bush's NSA. The subject is a meeting on July 5, 2001.

"At the special meeting on July 5 were the FBI, Secret Service, FAA, Customs, Coast Guard, and Immigration. We told them that we thought a spectacular al Qaeda terrorist attack was coming in the near future." That had been had been George Tenet's language. "We asked that they take special measures to increase security and surveillance. Thus, the White House did ensure that domestic law enforcement including the FAA knew that the CSG believed that a major al Qaeda attack was coming, and it could be in the U.S., and did ask that special measures be taken."