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.

 

Assange Included on Obama's "KILLER TUESDAY" List

page: 3
84
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Garbage source known for putting out lies, want to know a fact? Trump has openly said he thinks Edward Snowden should be executed.

But keep believing these junk sources.




posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: RedMenace16

oh i see. you're more of a state-sponsored media kinda guy, eh?

the kinda guy who would rather believe major media outlets who are complicit with the pentagon's terrorist videos, the federal government's wars, manipulating our elections, and the like?

sure seems like you're defending the right bunch's integrity.




posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: RedMenace16

Why, because Assange has so much faith in the MSM that all entertain those who want his head?



Here's on of the highlighted videos from Wikileaks 10th Anniversary celebration in Berlin. Now, does it seem so far fetched that he could have been on a hit list when both Dems and Reps have called for his death?
edit on 6-10-2016 by ghostrager because: Fix yt link



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: ghostrager

preposterous. just ridiculous.

absolutely unbelievable.

your sources are garbage.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:39 AM
link   
a reply to: facedye

The problem is a combination of cognitive dissonance, normalcy bias, and head-in-the-sandism that so many subscribe to.


"Some people never observe anything. Life just happens to them. They get by on little more than a kind of dumb persistence, and they resist with anger and resentment anything that might lift them out of that false serenity."


Frank Herbert, Heretics of Dune

You can see it here daily, quite silly isn't it?



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: facedye

I know, right? Guess I better grab the remote and flip through CNN, Fox, and MSNBC.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: facedye

I'm the kind of guy who says Trump is on record saying Edward Snowden should be executed.

So take that how you want it kid.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

not only silly, but also infuriating. infuriating enough to play their game and expose their empty reasoning, one s*$&%y and foundationless point of view at a time.




posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: RedMenace16
a reply to: facedye

I'm the kind of guy who says Trump is on record saying Edward Snowden should be executed.

So take that how you want it kid.


so what?

if true pundit reported that trump wanted snowden executed during a private e-mail discussion, would you have left that comment referencing hillary's drone strike comment on assange?

see, the problem is, you think this is a "Clinton bashing" thread. it's not.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:51 AM
link   
Who knows if this is true.

But let me tell you this, it seems awefully strange that Hillary didn't deny this.

You would think if she never had a thought of droning Assange, she would have said when asked "Of course I never said that!"

Yet she says she can't recall. Doesn't that seem like she is at least saying there is a possibility she said it? And if she thinks she may have said it, it probably means she at least thought it.

And to the people comparing this to Trump;

The big issue Hillary has against Trump is his temperament. She says you can't trust him with nuclear weapons because he is unstable. yet she gleefully cheered the torture of Gaddaffi, and now quite possibly suggested killing someone who reported news she didn't want.

Even if Trump is scary, so is Hillary. Trump never had the ability to make good on these threats, but Hillary did, and has proven she is sadistic (at least in the Gaddaffi case).

Without the temperment issue, hillary would be forced to defend her track record, and she knows that is a loss.

So I will be following this story carefully, because why should I trust a woman with nukes that is willing to drone strike someone for reporting news they don't like.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Damnit, exactly. thank you.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler



You would think if she never had a thought of droning Assange, she would have said when asked "Of course I never said that!"

Yet she says she can't recall. Doesn't that seem like she is at least saying there is a possibility she said it? And if she thinks she may have said it, it probably means she at least thought it.


Exactly. And let's not forgot how Hillary's campaign manager, Robby Mook, responded to Hillary's suggestion of a drone attack on Assange.



Deflect the question, demonize Trump.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: facedye
a reply to: Grambler

Damnit, exactly. thank you.



Thanks! Every once in a while I manage to say something that makes sense.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler




You would think if she never had a thought of droning Assange, she would have said when asked "Of course I never said that!"

I agree that normal people would respond that way, but a person that leads a life of lies (she IS a lawyer) would respond the way that she did.

So, yeah, I think she said it and it wasn't a joke.

edit on b000000312016-10-06T12:24:09-05:0012America/ChicagoThu, 06 Oct 2016 12:24:09 -05001200000016 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

You would think if she never had a thought of droning Assange, she would have said when asked "Of course I never said that!"


If you were in Hillary's (or other top political positions) would you not have thought of taking out Assange?

If we're being perfectly honest?

Having a thought, is not an action. We are human, we all have thoughts we would not necessarily put into action.

This is a "nit-picky" to me.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 12:33 PM
link   
I'm not commenting on my opinion of the OP, this is already turning
into a futile back and forth.

I'm just curious, hypothetically, if this were true and were to
have been coordinated by whoever's in charge of tactically droning
people, how would this go down?

In London , you launch Hellfire missiles at him? What about the collateral?
If not, and they wait till he's on a quiet country road, again, what about the
little English girl riding her bike behind a tree that no one saw? From an ally?
Who would be in charge? Would it be outsourced to the UK?
Could they then say 'Drones are a bit extreme, best send the SAS for a pro job'
Isn't that a little bit of an assassination of a foreign entity on English domestic soil,
I though that was against international law? What are the broader ramifications of her
statement? That there's an international elite that can blow you up anywhere, anytime?

That's global domination. Why is no one alarmed by this?



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Grambler

You would think if she never had a thought of droning Assange, she would have said when asked "Of course I never said that!"


If you were in Hillary's (or other top political positions) would you not have thought of taking out Assange?

If we're being perfectly honest?

Having a thought, is not an action. We are human, we all have thoughts we would not necessarily put into action.

This is a "nit-picky" to me.


Secretaries of state and career politicians shouldn't be expressing "thoughts we all have" with regards to killing people. they're put in charge, supposedly, and as a primary function, to set benevolent & productive policies while at the same time setting an example of excellence.

if you're going to defend someone who's supposed to know better and more than you and i, shouldn't there be something more tangible than "well we're all human" to choose from?



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 12:37 PM
link   
It's not just the alt right. I'm a progressive, and through a multi decade study of history and politics, am strongly aware that many democrat politicians are corrupt as well, and some are fake liberals and in reality neo cons (Clintons). Get your head out of the sand. You aren't serving liberal causes by refusing to root out corrupt politicians where they exist. In fact, it harms liberal causes.
edit on 6-10-2016 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: facedye

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Grambler

You would think if she never had a thought of droning Assange, she would have said when asked "Of course I never said that!"


If you were in Hillary's (or other top political positions) would you not have thought of taking out Assange?

If we're being perfectly honest?

Having a thought, is not an action. We are human, we all have thoughts we would not necessarily put into action.

This is a "nit-picky" to me.


Secretaries of state and career politicians shouldn't be expressing "thoughts we all have" with regards to killing people. they're put in charge, supposedly, and as a primary function, to set benevolent & productive policies while at the same time setting an example of excellence.

if you're going to defend someone who's supposed to know better and more than you and i, shouldn't there be something more tangible than "well we're all human" to choose from?


We don't live in La La Land. Idealism is a nice word, nothing more.

How unrealistic to think any person in high level politics wouldn't have thoughts of Assange being eliminated.

This is the Real World.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: facedye
Secretaries of state and career politicians shouldn't be expressing "thoughts we all have" with regards to killing people. they're put in charge, supposedly, and as a primary function, to set benevolent & productive policies while at the same time setting an example of excellence.

if you're going to defend someone who's supposed to know better and more than you and i, shouldn't there be something more tangible than "well we're all human" to choose from?


A couple years ago, several members of Congress (mostly, but not all Republican) went on national TV and were calling for an assassination of Assange. I don't remember complete numbers but around 30 Senators were on TV calling for it alongside several members of the House. That would have been around 2009-2010. At the time, it was a very popular opinion.



new topics

top topics



 
84
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join