Olbermann: It's time for Cheney to 'leave this country', page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 17 times
Topic started on 5-2-2009 @ 10:28 PM by jhill76

Olbermann: It's time for Cheney to 'leave this country'


rawstory.com
"Flatly, it may be time for Mr. Cheney to leave this country," he said. "The partisanship and divisiveness he ascribed his and President Bush's delusional policies of the last eight years that have roared forth from Mr. Cheney can only serve to undermine the nation's new president."

The anchor's sentiment was echoed at the confirmation hearing of Leon Panetta, former White House Chief of Staff and President Obama's nominee to lead the CIA.
(visit the link for the full news article)


reply posted on 5-2-2009 @ 11:10 PM by Jay-in-AR
reply to post by bigvig316


Oh, give me a break. The only thing that has EVER happened on American Soil that compares to the events of 9-11 is the Japanese Attack on Pearl Harbor.

NOTHING else compares. Smaller things happen, yes, but nothing like that day.
Your statements aren't accurate in any way, shape or form.

Even if you want to look at these "smaller incidents", like the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, take note that that did NOT happen on American Soil. The other NYC bombing? 1993. 1993-2001 = 8 years...
Therefore, it appears we are due for another one, after all, it has been that long since the last one. So, that being said, Bush didn't do anything to protect us from this apparent "cycle" of events that people allude to when they mention the fact that nothing has happened since 2001, he merely served out his term. But take note that after the last attack, they stripped us of a bunch of rights and CREATED this fear-based lifestyle we now lead.

Someone will say "the OK bombing"... That is a slightly different situation. Home-based anarchist type attack. Well, there have been many like it since then, even on Bush's watch. Granted, none as dramatic, but more just the same... D.C. Sniper, for one.

This logic is completely defunct. Maybe you need to rewatch the video that was linked in the OP's article.



reply posted on 5-2-2009 @ 11:14 PM by bigvig316
reply to post by converge


Obtaining information from capture combatants through some persuasive means is one way that they made America safer. Invading terrorist camps, and breaking up terrorist cells here and abroad helped to make us safer.

The Iraq war was another matter that needed to be dealt with. I am not sure it was dealt with in the right manner but it is done and can't be undone. And if we went in and stopped them from obtaining Nuclear Arms before they can be used on us or local allies in the Middle East. Perhaps Iran should look at the Iraq example.

I had none of my civil liberties trampled by them taping phones and watching internet traffic. If they cam to you about something suspicious then you probably doing something you shouldn't be doing.

My whole point is, did everything that Bush and Chaney do a crime. Weren't there other presidents who have done worse and on there own people. Let us not paint them in a bad light knowing what they had to face with the threat they were facing. They had to fight a war on terror that the like have never been seen in this country or fought on this kind of global guerrilla scale. The terror war attacked like guerrilla fighters but could be in London one day, France the next and the Miami the Sunday after. It is the flow of information that is important in fighting this kind of war. If they needed phone taps that had to be hurried to capture a terror cell then so be it. the first job of the President is to make us safe, and that is what they were doing. Whether through these "misguided" ways or not, they were making us safe.


reply posted on 5-2-2009 @ 11:19 PM by Jay-in-AR
reply to post by bigvig316


No, using torture was ILLEGAL and will forever set a precedent that International Law banning such activities no longer apply as we have redefined them, as a signatory to the treaties.
I didn't really get any further in your post than your first irrational paragraph. Sorry about that.



reply posted on 5-2-2009 @ 11:21 PM by bigvig316
reply to post by Jay-in-AR


What I was trying to say that since nothing has happen to America since 9/11 should be some proof the the tactics used in information gathering helped to prevent any future event from happening. Is it wrong to use any means necessary to make your country safe.


reply posted on 5-2-2009 @ 11:23 PM by Jay-in-AR
reply to post by bigvig316


Read my initial post, you have repeated yourself and I already addressed this issue.

Two lines.

[edit on 5-2-2009 by Jay-in-AR]



reply posted on 5-2-2009 @ 11:35 PM by Darky6K
Originally posted by bigvig316The Iraq war was another matter that needed to be dealt with. I am not sure it was dealt with in the right manner but it is done and can't be undone. And if we went in and stopped them from obtaining Nuclear Arms before they can be used on us or local allies in the Middle East. Perhaps Iran should look at the Iraq example.


And people wonder why no one likes us. Saddam had help from us; ignoring that repeats history. But hey, who cares on that? We only helped MS-13, Noriega, the Junta, Pablo Escobar,

I had none of my civil liberties trampled by them taping phones and watching internet traffic. If they cam to you about something suspicious then you probably doing something you shouldn't be doing.


They monitored EVERYONE. I'm in a justice class; one teacher working with the FBI, and they've admitted everything is watched. So yes; they look at you too.

My whole point is, did everything that Bush and Chaney do a crime. Weren't there other presidents who have done worse and on there own people. Let us not paint them in a bad light knowing what they had to face with the threat they were facing. They had to fight a war on terror that the like have never been seen in this country or fought on this kind of global guerrilla scale. The terror war attacked like guerrilla fighters but could be in London one day, France the next and the Miami the Sunday after. It is the flow of information that is important in fighting this kind of war. If they needed phone taps that had to be hurried to capture a terror cell then so be it. the first job of the President is to make us safe, and that is what they were doing. Whether through these "misguided" ways or not, they were making us safe.


Yeah, a lot of Presidents also say they need to make us safe in order to have the power to do anything. Once again; history. By your ideas, Clinton did it better because 9-11 didn't happen and al Qaeda didn't pull off anything that big.

The funny thing is too that they had notes beforehand and did nothing. So why care now?


reply posted on 5-2-2009 @ 11:35 PM by invisiblewoman
reply to post by bigvig316


or....and I consider this to be the most likely to be true interpretation


there aren't any Rabies Carrying /Majikl /Ten Foot Tall/ Bullet Proof/ Super Criminal Mastermind Terrorists, and 9/11 was a black op ,designed specifically to scare the pants off of you,so you would surrender all your freedom and all your money ,to him

and in turn he will protect you from a non existent enemy
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^