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.

 

Clinton: Cheney Not a Reliable Source

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by madhatr137
 


Thats very conveniant.

The memos showing torture doesn't work is okay for release, but showing the instances that it does work could endanger national security.

Very conveniant.


It is convenient, isn't it....just every time that the Bush Administration refused to turn over memos that boded poorly for their cases on...torture, the war, illegal wiretapping, the outing of CIA Agents for political purposes...etc, etc...

There is something in politics and law called precedent...it means that you operate by the standards set up and accepted by those that came before...its kind of like they say, "what comes aroud goes around."




posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by madhatr137
 



Oh so since the Bush administration did it then it only serves them right when the Obama administration does it.

Here I thought people voted for him because they were tired of the same politically game being played. Tired of Bush and the way he ran things.

Didn't Obama say voting for McCain would be voting for the same tired politics and policy?

Seems like his administration not releasing memos that show that it did indeed work in some instances is playing the same game he chastised McCain for.

I thought people voted him in because they were tired of the way the government was ran. Yet when he does the same as W everyone seems okay with it.

Basically we have the same game being played, only this time its the Dems doing it and for some reason the same people who booed W is applauding Obama.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by jd140
 


Hey, nobody here is saying that its right... I'm just sitting here smugly laughing to myself because I become incredibly amused when people get upset at Obama over these sort of things.

I'm still trying to figure out which is worse...

Those who supported these sort of actions and lies when the Bush Administration did them but won't now that the Obama Administration is doing them, albeit to a much lesser, but highly publicized, degree...

...or those who decried them as heinous during the Bush Administration but now find cynical vindication in them during the Obama Administration.



It just comes down to biases.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by drwizardphd
 


You assume correctly, a Clinton is a Clinton, doesn't really matter which one I borrowed the line from.

I don't know what your political leanings are but I hope you don't choke on your morsel because you remind me of one of the extreme lefty that can't seem to connect the dots and treats every news worthy item as a completely isolated incident that can no way tied tied to any other event.

The topic of this little thread is part of a completely bigger and much more important story, so don't hold my feet to the fire if you can't see the entire picture.
This deals with the disclosure of documents that affect your safety.
Bottom line, if Obama has his way, it will soon be against the law to defend ourselves.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alxandro
reply to post by drwizardphd
 


You assume correctly, a Clinton is a Clinton, doesn't really matter which one I borrowed the line from.

I don't know what your political leanings are but I hope you don't choke on your morsel because you remind me of one of the extreme lefty that can't seem to connect the dots and treats every news worthy item as a completely isolated incident that can no way tied tied to any other event.



OK. I'll bite.

Explain how Bill Clinton banging Monica Lewinsky has anything at all to do with Hillary Clinton challenging Dick Cheney's credibility.



....Seriously.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by drwizardphd
 


Well if you're asking seriously, it's like this.

I started this thread titled:
Clinton: Cheney Not a Reliable Source

..about the hearing where Clinton was asked about Cheney.

Since I sometimes tend to think faster than I can type, I failed to include the word "hearing" when I made this comment:

Originally posted by Alxandro
...
Besides, this isn't about Cheney anyway.
...


I tend to, on occasion, skip over words when I post, but usually edit to correct if I happen to catch it early.

Almost immediately someone reminded me of the thread title.

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
Thread Title - Clinton: Cheney Not a Reliable Source


Which I responded with a slight chuckle, but since I didn't really care to give an explanation of what I meant, I decided instead to add a little humor to the moment and borrow from Clinton with the comment:


Originally posted by Alxandro
"It depends on how you define this---"
"It depends on what the meaning of the words 'this' is" because in a nutshell, the heart of the matter is that THIS is actually all about the disclosure of documents.


So I can understand why some people thought I was referring to this "thread" when I really was referring to THIS "hearing".

So again, this hearing is not about Cheney, and it's not about Clinton either, it is about Obama's decision to release documents that will jeapardize the security of this country.

Pardon the confusion.



new topics

top topics
 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join