It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Five of the Most Dangerous Taliban Commanders in U.S. Custody Exchanged for American Captive

page: 17
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 01:04 PM
a reply to: OpinionatedB

Obedient presidents are never impeached.

posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 01:25 PM

originally posted by: OpinionatedB
a reply to: BobAthome

And that is why the non-disclosure and that is why they are trying to convince people he is a hero.

Now can we decide this president needs impeached?

You have some missing words in your post. And the answer to your question is a simple one: no.

posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 10:09 PM
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

based upon what president or presept in Law?,,may i ask.

purelly hype athetical, of course.

(A precept is a commandment, instruction, or order intended as an authoritative rule of action)

posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 10:10 PM

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: OpinionatedB
a reply to: BobAthome

And that is why the non-disclosure and that is why they are trying to convince people he is a hero.

Now can we decide this president needs impeached?

You have some missing words in your post. And the answer to your question is a simple one: no.

i quote "a simple one: no." are u calling the Law ,simple?,, as in simple minded., or simple as oppsed too complex?

posted on Jun, 9 2014 @ 01:42 PM

originally posted by: Nyiah
a reply to: eriktheawful

Still reading the thread, but if this hasn't been mentioned, I feel it should be:

Now would be the time to start contacting & pressuring your senator to impeach. No, not a damned petition, cram their inboxes, voicemails, mailboxes full of demands to do it. Be relentless. If the senate wants to keep their jobs, they'll listen. If they don't listen, you know who to vote out.

Now, back to reading this thread.


posted on Jun, 9 2014 @ 04:31 PM
Truth: 587 Guantanamo Taliban prisoners have been released by the previous Republican administration. ALL "detainees" are being scheduled to be released at the bases closing.

We now have a report that Bergdahl was being tortured in captivity.

Obama administration had to move quick to get the release.

I, as a honorably discharged veteran of the US armed services, fully support this decision.

As an added bonus (there is a bright side to all this), those released Taliban members can now be dispatched by a drone strike if they ever venture back to Afghanistan while we are there. They may have thought so, but they were safer inside their cells.

Right-wing media has really sunk to an all new low, for attacking our own POWs. WE - the American people, dispatch justice to our own military members (if they indeed deserted), we do not leave it up to the Taliban.

posted on Jun, 14 2014 @ 08:52 AM

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
The Taliban also claimed Bergdahl was teaching them to make explosives and IEDs. It's propaganda, plain and simple. They made similar claims with other captives.

No - you are incorrect, The truth is outing as we speak.

posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 10:23 AM

originally posted by: eriktheawful

This means that the White House will be working quickly to get Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi released from a Mexican jail too..........right?

I mean here we have someone who did NOT walk off from their post willinging, but was instead arrested while on leave, who is being held against his will. Who by some accounts is being tortured and treated quite badly in that jail. Who was not actively seeking out people who mean to do others harm, but instead simply made a wrong turn and ended up on the wrong side of the US/Mexican border.

Right? I mean they should be acting quickly for him, yes?


Tahmooressi's story is falling apart. It's too early to say if he was attempting to smuggle in weapons to his Mexican friends or not, but more evidence is being released by border authorities and it is painting a much darker picture of Tahmooressi.

Investigation and Video Evidence Suggest Imprisoned Marine DID NOT Enter Mexico in Error
Ex Marine no ingresó a México por error (Mexican news paper:

According to the print edition of the link above (which has the full version), Tahmorresi admits he met with several Mexican 'friends' in Tijuana, after walking across the border. This was one of six trips into Mexico from the same border crossing. He drove across that border crossing several times, yet claimed after his arrest it was his first time. His lawyer told him via email to "stick to the script", not to admit previous border crossings. (Mexican authorities also would have released him after his hearing, except his mother also fired his "stick to the script" lawyer, which is why he is still being held in jail until his next hearing.)

What else is Marine Andrew Tahmooresi Hiding as New Details and Contradictions Emerge
Cold Hard Facts Concerning the Case of Andrew Paul Tahmooressi – Caught in Mexico with Illegal Firearms

It's also now known he brought in over 400 rounds of ammo with these weapons, and that he left these weapons inside his vehicle, unlocked and unattended, while he 'partied' in Mexico (a violation of CA law.)

Judicial Process versus Media Spin – Debunking Media’s Coverage of Andrew Tahmooressi

His story about not being able to turn around is also bunk. Every lane has access to a turnaround, and his claim that being in the "far right lane" kept him from the u-turn next to the left lane is false, as the far right lane is for declarations, and also has a turnaround. But that is not where he was driving through, after sifting through his lies about being in the far right "declaration" lane, the video shows he went through the "no declaration" lane closer to the left. Had the border agents not stopped him fro missing a license plate, he would have been through to re-meet his Mexican friends with a stockpile of firearms and ammo.

Yes, there are jersey barriers at the San Ysidro crossing but they appear to end well before you actually cross into Mexico. Not being able to make a U-turn before entering Mexico was the same lame excuse used by trucker Jabin Bogan in 2012 when he was busted with 250,000 rounds of NATO grade ammo in his semi trailer.

What part of “Guns Prohibited in Mexico” is so difficult to understand to some people? Even if you can’t read, there are pictures to make the point

The dark, unsigned border crossing that Andrew Tahmooressi claims to have not known he was crossing into Mexico through.

How could Tahmooressi not know he was going into Mexico? What is it about this photo that would give a person a clue they were about to enter a foreign country?

This is a raw photo of the weapons discovered by Mexican Customs agents and SEDENA during a search of Andrew Tahmooressi’s 2003 Ford F-150. This is why he is in prison, guilty as charged.

Two last thoughts: First, his 911 call, which Tahmooressi, his mother, and right-wing media portrayed as being made immediately after being stopped by Mexican border agents was not actually made until one hour after his arrest. Second, he was not under any PTSD treatment. He lived in Florida, and between FLA and DC, he had several treatment centers available to him, all much closer then southern CA. - not to mention, he would have been able to go to closer treatment centers in FLA or in the south and still live at home, instead of - as his mother claims, living homeless in his truck at the Mexican border in California, armed to the teeth, partying by day in Tijuana yet homeless at night in 'Murica...

Tahmooressi is no POW. He is not a political prisoner. Right-wing media once again is full of BS.

posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 04:27 PM
a reply to: frankensence

Now that's a fine picture you have there. Empty lanes all the way to the gates, and so much empty could drive against traffic to literally exit from a U-Turn in one way lanes. Question?

Have you been across the U.S./Mexico border? If so..where at? I've been across at Tijuana/San Yasidro in a couple different spots. El Paso, Laredo and a little town called Progresso for what was probably my most pleasant experience in Mexico before their civil war really got going.

I've rarely ever seen ANY U.S. border crossing (Canada either for that matter) as clear and clean as that one photo shows. In my personal experience, the idea of flipping around 100 yards from the guys at the border post would be an extreme, if it's even physically possible. Do we know traffic conditions at that crossing at the time he turned into it?

What he had in his car isn't that far off what I've had in my own car from time to time and Missouri doesn't have the same laws about paranoia to extremes about a gun in a car. Hell, we still have guys with rifles in window racks in some rural areas...and not all are scoped hunting rifles. It could be because he was so close to a border that actually has signs warning about how out of control the area IS...that he felt it necessary to have a few personal weapons.

I'll be interested in what he's saying about this after he's on THIS side and not being beaten, have starved and screwed with for amusement in a Mexican jail. Those places have their reputations for damn good reasons, as a few of my friends could attest to. (I managed to avoid that life experience myself)

posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 12:27 PM
Well i read the first 5 pages but didn't have the stomach to page trough 10 more pages of what i suspected may contain more partisan ignorance so if i missed someone else saying the following please do excuse me:

The 5 'gentlemen' released should have been released years and years and years ago because there has never been any verifiable or credible evidence that any of them ever harmed an American or plotted to do so. The US government would not have released them for what they essentially consider a traitor if they were at all dangerous anyways unless you believe that they are planning to use these guys in another false flag ops in the future..... According the the logic of American exceptionalism even a supposedly traitorous American should be worth at least 5 supposed *terrorist* scumbags so why on earth would anyone be against this?

You are with *them* if you don't agree with everything the government orders you to do even if you are born and bred American? Hell Nazi's hung for burning villages filled with people who supported the partisans killing Nazi's and the ' I was only following orders defense' didn't work for all of them? In fact so many of these killers said that they were ' only following orders' that sane people everywhere decided that that should never be a defense for committing war crimes unless the person committing them was himself under duress....

Should American soldiers then kill people they believe to be innocent, and thus ignore what few rules separates barbarians from supposedly civilized free people, or should they be so afraid of refusing their own government that they are forced to hide among their supposed enemies? What is wrong with this picture?

Berghdal ( or whatever his name is) did not "let his country down" by not killing strangers in a strange country especially considering that these people would have been no threat had he and every other American soldier simply stayed home and perhaps became air marshals or helped to reform the completely dysfunctional us Intelligence simplex. . What bergdhal did by refusing to start or continue to kill foreigners in their own country is to avoid creating more future people that may perhaps legitimately hate innocent Americans for living in America having helped to pay for the drones and bombs killing their women and children * by accident* in their own homes and wedding parties.

If the mightiest county and supposedly 'best' country on earth literally tries to 'solve' every problem or disagreement it has with others trough economic violence or physical violence why should anything else be expected of us less exceptional creatures anyways? When have you guys ever set us that 'better' example you have been talking about for nearly a century? We *have* to live in your crazy world but we do not have to accept your crazy neo liberal non economics ( since it's killing us, and many of you in the US as well) and since the odds of you being able to continue bombing us into 'freedom' for another century is probably not practical, and certainly wont be appreciated, could you please consider stopping? You could use the money for the free health care and perhaps even afford that social security that seems to be going out of political fashion?

Thank you,

edit on 27-6-2014 by StellarX because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 14  15  16   >>

log in