TargetRichEnvironment

Reading this, I thought this guy’s name sounded familiar (link):

Obama adviser takes slap at Cheney’s terror spin

Associated Press
WASHINGTON – Dick Cheney’s criticism of the Obama White House’s terrorism-fighting policies came under a harsh response yesterday, with the former vice president accused of being ignorant or intentionally misleading.

John Brennan, President Obama’s counterterrorism adviser, said he has worked for five administrations and that Obama is as determined as anyone to keep the nation safe.

Cheney said last week that Obama is “trying to pretend” that the U.S. is not at war with terrorists. The result, he said, is that Americans are less safe.

“I’m very disappointed in the vice president’s comments,” Brennan said.”Either the vice president is willfully mischaracterizing this president’s position both in terms of the language he uses and the actions he’s taken, or he’s ignorant of the facts.

“And in either case it doesn’t speak well of what the vice president is doing. The clear evidence is that this president has been very, very strong. In his inaugural address he said we’re at war with this international network of terrorists. We continue to say that we’re at war with al Qaeda.”

Brennan added that “partisan politics should be put aside when something as important to national security as the threat of terrorism. . . . It continues to haunt us. And we have to make sure that we stay focused on al Qaeda . . . I don’t care what Republicans or Democrats say out there. We need to continue to prosecute this war because al Qaeda the organization needs to be destroyed.”

In recent comments, Cheney said Obama “seems to think if he gets rid of the words ‘war on terror,’ we won’t be at war.”

John Brennan… John Brennan?? Where have I heard that name before?  Oh yeah, I better not question his expertise in counterterrorism- because HE WAS THE GUY BRIEFED ON “UNDERWEAR BOMBERS” IN OCTOBER (link):

White House Adviser Briefed in October on Underwear Bomb Technique
Newsweek

By Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball

White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan was briefed in October on an assassination attempt by Al Qaeda that investigators now believe used the same underwear bombing technique as the Nigerian suspect who tried to blow up Northwest Airlines Flight 253 on Christmas Day, U.S. intelligence and administration officials tell NEWSWEEK.

The briefing to Brennan was delivered at the White House by Muhammad bin Nayef, Saudi Arabia’s chief counterterrorism official. In late August, Nayef had survived an assassination attempt by an operative dispatched by the Yemeni branch of Al Qaeda who was pretending to turn himself in. The operative had tried to kill the Saudi prince by detonating a bomb on his body, but stumbled on his way into the prince’s palace and blew himself up.

Saudi officials initially thought the bomb had been secreted in the operative’s anal cavity. But after investigating the matter more thoroughly, they concluded it had likely been sewn into his underwear, thereby allowing the operative to bypass security checks before his meeting with the prince. A main purpose of Nayef’s briefing for Brennan was to alert U.S. officials to the use of the underwear technique.

Why don’t you stay out of politics and keep your eye on the ball, errr, uhhh dot. Focus on connecting dots, not attacking Cheney for something he said that’s true. (link):

“As I’ve watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war. He seems to think if he has a low-key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of Sept. 11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won’t be at war.

“He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core Al Qaeda-trained terrorists still there, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gets rid of the words, ‘war on terror,’ we won’t be at war. But we are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren’t, it makes us less safe. Why doesn’t he want to admit we’re at war? It doesn’t fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn’t fit with what seems to be the goal of his presidency – social transformation – the restructuring of American society. President Obama’s first object and his highest responsibility must be to defend us against an enemy that knows we are at war.”

What did Cheney say that was untrue?  As for Brennan’s statement that he’s served in five administrations, I think the words “Richard Clarke” answer that attempt at claims of political agnosticism.