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.

 

MSNBC's Keith Olbermann blasts Bush and Fox News (video)

page: 6
4
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 06:59 PM
link   
HOW DARE I TAKE THIS MAN'S RANT AS THE GOSPEL???

BECAUSE HE SPOKE THE TRUTH. WHEN WORDS ESCAPES ME, he told it like it is.

The truth is the truth is the truth is the truth, and i dont care WHO says it.

It could have been anyone with THE SAME OPINION, ANYONE.


I look forward to this man to represent my sentiments anytime.

BTW, this is precisely what this government wants. Us acting and fighting like ANIMALS.





posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 07:28 PM
link   


BTW, this is precisely what this government wants. Us acting and fighting like ANIMALS.


Right, did you bother to read my entire post? ... didn't think so. Though I commend you for proving my point.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck



BTW, this is precisely what this government wants. Us acting and fighting like ANIMALS.


Right, did you bother to read my entire post? ... didn't think so. Though I commend you for proving my point.


What makes you so certain he was replying to your post?



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Rockpuck, that was an excellent speech, and I agree that the arguing going on in this thread and across the board is ridiculous. I was going to say something similar, but not so much about how we Americans are so self involved. It is true that we look out for our own interests. But if the tables were turned, do you really think people from other countries will care about our plight? The fact is we are also the most generous country in the world, but we are also selfish at the same time.

No, what I was going to bring up is that it doesn’t matter who is to blame for 9/11, the real tragedy is the lives that were lost. This is what I feel people are forgetting. Can you imagine being someone who lost a loved one that day, and then listening to the bickering that is going on right now?

What Olderman is basically saying is that this administration should also accept some of the blame, but instead they used 9/11 to further their agenda of invading Iraq. Again, I find it amazing that so many are continuing to argue and support their views when so many people are dieing. This is the real tragedy, and we should all be as angry as Olderman, even if we don’t agree with him entirely.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Firebat... if you read my post, which you most likely did not, and then read DG's post, who is a female, just an FYI, then you would be able to use common sense and put them to gether to know she was talking about my post.

Hal900

Excelent points, especially that if the tables where turned no one would care about us, if we fell tomorow no one would miss us because that means they have the chance to be the next USA, power wise of course.

And there is nothing wrong with looking out for our own national intrest, we are entering the era of our civilization where we fight to survive, like Rome with the barbarians, a constant state of warefare to ensure the economy survives. Our military industrial complex can never be stoped, it is a wild animal out of control, if we did stop it the economy would crash because the government isn't spending money to make bullets and tanks anymore.. so we go to war, we fight little countries to ensure resources stay open and the military remains needed..

The flip side to that.. we wonder why there are terrorist out there that want us dead.. That directs to our foriegn policy that will never change and arrogant attitude that we embrace the world with.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 09:09 PM
link   
I find it amusing that those who have criticized Keith Olbermann prefer to be obsessed by his possible commercial motivations, rather than even attempt to rebut the actual content of his commentary.


Talk about cannibalizing a conservative philosophy...


There is a material difference when one attacks those who attempt to gain commercial advantage via deceitful practices, but to attack someone merely because they might make some money by promoting a political position is laughable when coming from so many self-proclaimed free-market conservatives.




[edit on 28-9-2006 by loam]



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 09:35 PM
link   
What?! Has there been no rebuff to this bloke's opinion?! If he is so crazy, why hasn't there been a person that has put him in his place, despite him not backing up his points?
Surely by now, they must have gathered enough "evidence" to pin the blame on Clinton and the idiot liberals that follow him. Or is everyone selling seeds by mail order?



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 09:37 PM
link   
mmm what do you mean macdough...



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 09:43 PM
link   
Let me rephrase. Why has there been no attacks on what the bloke is saying, only slurs against his character? And another question, what is with the seeds insult?
It's terribly funny, but it doesn't really make sense.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 09:55 PM
link   
Very interesting piece indeed. I really liked his analogy to 1984. Liberty for security? I think not. And time and time again thats what bush has asked for. I really think olbermann hit the nail on the head, reagardless of whether or not it was for boosting book sales or show ratings.

Accountability is out the window in the whitehouse. Perhaps I should start a thread with this, but I challenge republican or democrat (I'm neither here nor there, I vote for who I like the best regardless of party) to give me an example of bush admiting, apologizing, or make amends for a problem he caused.

Good video link. I enjoyed it. I think our founding fathers would like to hear what Olbermann has to say.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by MacDonagh
Why has there been no attacks on what the bloke is saying, only slurs against his character?


Because attacks against what he is saying might be discredited by the actual facts.


Attacking him is only necessary if you think it is your best option... Think about that one for a moment.


[edit on 28-9-2006 by loam]



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 10:02 PM
link   
Loam.. the fact being it is an opinion.. not fact? Did he publish a report, detailing when where why how who what? No. Does this 'former' crack head have super top seceret administrator friends with inside looks into the going ons of Washington... oh.. he doesnt huh.. just good coke dealer relations.. ah.. ic.

This guy is a good speaker. Other then that, he is no more credible then picking a person at random from a crowd. What he said sounds good. Some may be true, such as Bushes attempts to destroy civil liberties. But it is an opinion.. I fail to see where that got mixed up.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Does this 'former' crack head have super top seceret administrator friends with inside looks into the going ons of Washington... oh.. he doesnt huh.. just good coke dealer relations.. ah.. ic.


Thank you for demonstrating my point so beautifully.


There is certainly opinion in Olbermann's piece (I never stated otherwise), but there is also fact. Need I laboriously detail those you conveniently fail to notice?



Originally posted by Rockpuck
This guy is a good speaker. Other then that, he is no more credible then picking a person at random from a crowd. What he said sounds good. Some may be true, such as Bushes attempts to destroy civil liberties. But it is an opinion..


If "some may be true", then how is it "opinion"? And how is that distinguished from fact?


:shk:



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 10:27 PM
link   
Keith did an excellent job on getting the TRUTH OUT , and here's the National Security Archives Report to back-up everything Keith said when it comes to"what Clinton did before leaving office and what Bush did not do in the first 8 months of taking office in 2001.


www.gwu.edu...




Bush Administration's First Memo
on al-Qaeda Declassified

January 25, 2001 Richard Clarke Memo:
"We urgently need . . . a Principals level
review on the al Qida network."

Document Central to Clarke-Rice Dispute on Bush Terrorism Policy Pre-9/11

National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 147

Edited by Barbara Elias

February 10, 2005 - Original Post

Update - September 27, 2006

Update - September 27, 2006

"A Comprehensive Strategy to Fight Al-Qaeda"?
Rice versus Clinton on January 2001 Clarke Memo

Washington, D.C., September 27, 2006 - In a series of recent public statements, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has again denied that the Clinton administration presented the incoming administration of President George W. Bush with a "comprehensive strategy" against al-Qaeda. Rice's denials were prompted by a September 22 Fox News interview with Bill Clinton in which the former president asserted that he had "left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy" with the incoming Bush administration in January 2001. In a September 25 interview, Rice told the New York Post, "We were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al-Qaida," adding that, "Nobody organized this country or the international community to fight the terrorist threat that was upon us until 9/11."

The crux of the issue is a January 25, 2001, memo on al-Qaeda from counterterrorism coordinator Richard Clarke to National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, the first terrorism strategy paper of the Bush administration. The document was central to the debate over pre-9/11 Bush administration policy on terrorism and figured prominently in the 9/11 hearings held in 2004. A declassified copy of the Clarke memo was first posted on the Web by the National Security Archive in February 2005.

Clarke's memo, described below, "urgently" requested a high-level National Security Council review on al-Qaeda and included two attachments: a declassified December 2000 "Strategy for Eliminating the Threat from the Jihadist Networks of al-Qida: Status and Prospects" and the September 1998 "Pol-Mil Plan for al-Qida," the so-called Delenda Plan, which remains classified.





A Very Interesting Read,.... a MUST READ for anyone that wants to know the TRUTH and to KNOW that Bush and his Administration are NOTHING BUT LIARS !!!

Keith O. did an AWESOME JOB getting the truth out and hit Bush and the Fox News square in their faces



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 02:19 AM
link   
Why is this on ATS and not PTS?

More evidence of the left wing slant and bias me thinks...


If this was a Bill O'Reilly rant the thread would have been locked by now.

At least we now know where we stand on this forum..(as if there was any doubt)



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 06:57 AM
link   
Take it personallu, if you wish. I dont have to apologize to anyone for my thoughts and opinions.

People are not going to change their minds, inspite of all the bickering. Everyone who doesnt agree with the Republicans view is wrong, and everyone who is liberal minded is a weak nut.

I am a nut. Abd proud of it.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 07:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Apoc
More evidence of the left wing slant and bias me thinks...


My bias is government-related.

If you read the first post...

This intense commentary on the Bush Administration in regard to the War on Terrorism and 9/11 is as close to a mainstream summary of many sweeping conspiracy theory topics discussed here on ATS and throughout the "Truth Movement".

There was no "side taking"

Many members decided they were unable to discuss the content of the op/ed and instead devolved into the typical "blame the other side" bickering they've been trained to do.

I think the evolution of this thread is a prime example of the political brainwashing conspiracy.


Sad really.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 07:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
I think the evolution of this thread is a prime example of the political brainwashing conspiracy.

Sad really.


I couldn't agree more.


I keep hoping there are enough who remain loyal to the concept of honest discussion of the issues...

In the real world, off this board, I think that still remains largely true.

For the sake of our foreseeable future, I hope it is...

*loam hopes for the best*



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 07:53 AM
link   
The arguments made by certain members in this thread related directly to what Olberman said really.

Instead of having a conversation or debate about a topic and dealing with facts, the administration, fox news and everyone related to them choose slander and propaganda in an attempt to discredit everyone who oposes them, to rewrite history to their liking and to keep their dirty's secret.

Just keep trying to discredit this man guys, the more rediculous you get doing it, the more your prove this mans point.

Anyway, all I can say is WOW, finaly a reporter that speaks as it is instead of reporting preformated press texts and "official" stories.

Thumbs up for this guy and lets hope there will be more people speaking out.

I know some celebrities have also done this over the last year, but they were usualy shushed rapidly by all media outlets, once the propaganda machine started working its defamation and slander routines.

This guy has a whee bit more exposure and lets hope it helps.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Too many sheeple here. Y'all are falling for the Schtik. All this guy has done is given his OPINIONS! You know what they say about those....just like rear-ends...everybody has one. So what makes Keithy-boy opinion more valuable than others? Because he happens to have the same opinion as 99.9% of the sheeple on this board?

You all have fell for the joke. He is no more sincere in his opinion than Clinton ever was as president.

All he's trying to accomplish is sells for his silly book, and increased ratings for his pathetic attempt at news. Better off going back to ESPN.

At first, his show was funny. It was a humerous way of looking at the news of the day. Just not funny anymore.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join