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.

 

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

page: 1
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:28 PM
link   

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)




posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Ha, this is funny. I wonder how many other people feel the same way about Cheney and them. I think we already know that answer.

I am glad to see someone in the media actually speak up about this. My favorite part:


"I was disappointed by those comments, because the implication is that somehow this country is more vulnerable to attack because the president of the United States wants to abide by the law and the Constitution," said Panetta. "I think we’re a stronger nation when we abide by the law and the Constitution."


rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:47 PM
link   
You know not all the Bush and Chaney did was bad. The fact that we never had another 9/11 is proof that some of the policies that they endorsed helped to protect us. They did what needed to be done at the time in order to make a more secure nation. And if Chaney is going to give a warning it should be takes seriously. Besides who is Keith Olbermann to tell any one to go away. We can say the same about his leftist views. What if Bill O'Reilly said the same thing about a democrat?



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:47 PM
link   
How is this any different than the "with us or against us" mentality of "love it or leave it"...Olberman is a hypocrite.


+9 more 
posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:49 PM
link   
i personally think olbermann should leave the country. he has no sense and almost started crying on the air when that california prop was passed about gays in california. He said he gets goosebumps whenever obama makes a speech. he is such a tool i just wish someone would knock him out.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigvig316
You know not all the Bush and Chaney did was bad. The fact that we never had another 9/11 is proof that some of the policies that they endorsed helped to protect us.


I don't see how can you say that with any level of certainty. It's not proof that their policies prevented another attack, numerous other variables could have played a part in why there hasn't been another attack in US soil.

Besides, what policies exactly are you talking about? Invading Iraq? Authorizing torture? Spying on Americans? If those are the policies, then I clearly don't see how any of that has made us any more safe.



And if Chaney is going to give a warning it should be takes seriously.


Like the one he gave about Saddam and his WMDs? That he was trying to acquire a Nuclear weapon and was going to use it on us?



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Uhh, I highly DOUBT Insaney is going to leave the country, since this country is one of the very few who won't hold him accountable for all of his crimes against humanity.

No, we are stuck with this putrid stain upon humanity unfortunately.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:10 PM
link   
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.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:11 PM
link   
my favorite is when Cheney says that the Bush Administration has released however many terrorist from Gitmo and they have resumed terrorist activity


Olberman is all ,well then you and the former Pres released so called terrorists !! ,that was you Dick!



Dick Cheney is a moron,



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:14 PM
link   
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.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigvig316
You know not all the Bush and Chaney did was bad. The fact that we never had another 9/11 is proof that some of the policies that they endorsed helped to protect us.


How about the fact that 911 should have never happened in the first place?



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigvig316
The fact that we never had another 9/11 is proof that some of the policies that they endorsed helped to protect us.


Oh my god...

Santa Claus has never beaten the snot out of me... the only thing between here and the north pole is NORAD.

Thanks NORAD, for protecting me against Santa Claus.

lol.



Note that Al-Qaeda had never successfully pulled anything on that scale off BEFORE the Bush/Cheney regime either.

With your logic, previous administrations must have been GOD like to hold them off without making a single policy change to assist them.



All you're doing here is making excuses for yourself as to why you back an incompetent regime.
You'll do yourself a world of good if you allow yourself to come to terms with the fact that the administration you supported, turned out not to be what you expected.

I voted NDP here in Canada... do I support them now? Heck no, they disgusted me with what they tried to do.
You ARE allowed to change your allegiances.

Democracy quite often depends on it.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   
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.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:21 PM
link   
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.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:23 PM
link   
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]



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigvig316
You know not all the Bush and Chaney did was bad. The fact that we never had another 9/11 is proof that some of the policies that they endorsed helped to protect us. They did what needed to be done at the time in order to make a more secure nation. And if Chaney is going to give a warning it should be takes seriously. Besides who is Keith Olbermann to tell any one to go away. We can say the same about his leftist views. What if Bill O'Reilly said the same thing about a democrat?


No, there was just Bali, London, Madrid, Israel numerous times, Iraq, Mexico's war, etc. All the people we arrested based on circumstantial evidence. Yeah, he may have done something for Africa, but some of that is actually just to look good. Skull and Bones and CFR people do that.

I like how Cheney threatened we would be nuked. If that's so, and he knows this...why didn't they stop it???



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:29 PM
link   
Yeah his time for leaving the country was back when he was out of high school.

Send him to Guantanamo or The Hague.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:35 PM
link   

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?



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:35 PM
link   
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



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:39 PM
link   
This is my view on torture. It isn't right but is something that we are going to have to accept because they just aren't going to give up information willingly. And who are we trying to kid about torture. It goes on in American prisons. How many times we hear about a confession being beaten out of guy or people being put in the hole and given half ration to be given time to "think" about things. Or making a inmate exposed to a rape gang until he flip and they move him to different quarters. Until we get rid of torture here in our prison systems and on our own citizens, the pow in GITMO should come second. Besides when we close GITMO now next year, where are these prisoners going to go. Some place like Yemen where the torture they could receive would be worse than water boarding.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join