It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Rice: US not facing 'existential' threats

page: 3
11
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Indigo5




Since it happened under a GOP administration? And we haven't had an attack under the President you are accusing of being "Dove"..


What the hell was Bengahzi ?



A tragic attack on an embassy in Libya? Are you equating that to what happened in NYC in 2001 on American soil????? By what measure?

We lost over 5,000 Americans (Soldiers) in the Middle East under GOP Leadership and Policy of invasion and occupation...Another 3,000 in the 9-11 attacks..

And according to you, we remain under an equal threat now?...despite not having the casualty count of the last administration?..

So...Either wars and Occupation as you suggest ...did nothing but fuel the threat and are a proven failure since you claim it worse now than ever...thus President Obama's Policy is effective you? Or he should be invading and occupying as you suggest to address a threat that is diminished and only exasperated by invasion and occupation?

Interested in how you plan to contort reality to fit this theme of yours?

Scratch that...Not really interested in the mental gymnastics atop BS mountain in an attempt to maintain the Logic Be Damned/I Hate Obama worldview..

No 9-11 like attacks since he has become President..

A hell of a lot less lives lost than under the last guy..

No new invasions and occupations....

Apparently Invasions and Occupations were not the answer..

edit on 9-2-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 06:06 PM
link   



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

9/11/2001

Bush only in office for a few months.

Intel collapsed under Clinton. Balk.

9/11 planned years in advance.

Clinton's fault.




posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 06:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Krazysh0t

ACUALLY I have you are just going LA,LA.
THEY don't have enclaves there is nothing holding us back.www.wnd.com...


World News Daily? REALLY? THAT tabloid rag. Lol good try.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

AND the pat denial OF ANY oposing source ,THAT is old too.
I have explaned to you,I HAVE the training to assess BETTER than you and your Alinsky games depict a VERY weak position.
It is illustrated incorrect by an OPPOSING informative source which is nominally where such childish crap crashes and burns...
THEN too quoting any ADMINISTRATIVE scource would be a compromised effort.
WHATCHA got PROG?
edit on 10-2-2015 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-2-2015 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 02:17 PM
link   



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

Did you just call me a prog? Because I am NOT a progressive. How about dropping with the assumptions about me? I know it's tough as you like to perpetuate the us vs them mentality going from our last conversation.

So I did a source check on your news source and LITERALLY only WND and various other more untrustworthy conservative sites (beforeitsnews for instance) are reporting on this. I also found a transcript of when this occurred. No surprise, Fox News.

I found this part of the transcript illuminating:

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Kimberly Guilfoyle along with Bob Beckel, Eric Bolling, Dana Perino and Greg Gutfeld. It's 5 o'clock in New York City and this is "The Five."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES COMEY, FBI DIRECTOR: I have opened cases in every state except Alaska.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUILFOYLE: That was the director of the FBI, revealing the frightening news that his agency has opened cases on suspects who may be tied to ISIS in 49 U.S. states. Here's more from James Comey on the Islamist threat inside America.


Why was the FBI Director's line taken out of context? Where is the text before and after that line? Why is it necessary for Guilfoyle to EXPLAIN to us what he is talking about? If I had to guess, I'd say some crucial information is being left out here. So let's dig on.

Here's the original source:
FBI Director warns of MS terrorism activity


It's just one of the major investigations the Federal Bureau of Investigations is conducting in Mississippi and officials say cooperation with state and local law enforcement is key to stamping out those threats.

"Mississippi is a great state, but like all 50 states it has troubled souls," said the FBI top agent.

According to Comey, the Magnolia State is no exception when it comes to ISIL and Al Queda terrorism .

Those involved are reportedly recruited through social media and internet communication.

"Yes we have open cases in Mississippi that relate to this threat, but I can't say more about that," said Comey. "Again I'm not singling out Mississippi. I have open cases in every state except Alaska."

Topping the Jackson bureau's in state investigations are public corruption, civil rights violations and violent crime. In Jackson the problem is violent offenses.

"Nearly every state has seen a decline in violent crime except for pockets in particular neighborhoods, and we don't want to declare victory and leave those neighborhoods alone," added Comey.


AHA! So when put in context Comey was speaking about the criminal element in Mississippi. He didn't speak to the threat level of these open cases on ISIL and he went on to talk about Mississippi's greater problems. Namely public corruption, civil rights violations, and violent crime. So while yes there are cases involving ISIL in Mississippi (and the rest of the country), they are small potatoes in priority compared to what the FBI is really looking into.

THAT is how you vet a source buddy.
edit on 10-2-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

AGAIN to COUNTER the idea place an idea that more accurately depicts the OPPOSITE instead of simple deflection which is THAT.
edit on 10-2-2015 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 02:46 PM
link   



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

I just refuted your entire source as sensationalist nonsense and you come back with that silliness? You are a lost a cause and only care about your own rhetoric, not any other points. You've already shown your true colors in that anyone who disagrees with you is a progressive so there is no where to go with you. Since I don't like debating politics nearly as much as I like debating religion or science, I think I will bow out now. Enjoy fearing the big, bad Muslims like the right wing media tells you to do.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 03:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t
YAY!

Weren't offering any info other than deflection anyway.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 03:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
hotair.com...


Before I go, I just wanted to refute this stupid "evidence" as well. From your source:

POSTED AT 2:19 PM ON AUGUST 11, 2007 BY ALLAHPUNDIT

Yeah, I'm sure that intel is STILL jittery about Al Qaeda emptying out training camps 8 years later... Though I'm sure this is more deflection. Lol.
edit on 10-2-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I'll believe military over civilian when I hear they are raining in camps but YOU can parrot the line as you will and I'll keep watching as I WILL.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 05:49 PM
link   



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join