It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The door to impeachement swings WIDE open! Treasonous acts under investigation!

page: 11
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 09:11 AM
Listen, this is no different than the government paying teamsters. It's a necessary evil of doing business. While it's widely known that the teamsters union is a mob run organization the US government often used the teamsters union to cross picket lines. Pretty much the same thing.

The Mujahadeen is still active in Afghanistan, and for the most part we supposedly do business with them or people who are friendly to our cause, now whether or not they do business with people that aren't kinda gives a gray area to the whole situation.

While I am confident that our government truly tries to do business with people that are friendly to our cause. There is absolutely no guarantee that those people aren't double dealing us.

So, if true, the president is now accused of giving aid and comfort to the enemy, the one element needed to meet the definition of treason. Unintentional? I don't *think* so.

But, was there ever any doubt he was planning to do this?

So no, your accusation that the president knowingly is aiding and giving comfort to the enemy does not hold water. Unfortunately for your argument, the president has absolutely no way of knowing the minds of people. It's not if he is sitting in his oval office rubbing his hands together plotting to pay off the Taliban and Al Qaeda laughing manically as our soldiers die on the battlefield.

Is there any doubt that monies paid for protectionism would be going to Taliban insurgency?

Yes in fact there is a doubt. This part is what is under investigation.

He even passed a LAW to pay them off by putting it in the spending bill!

Can you provide us with a THOMAS link to that law?

Money buys everything, huh? Even a one way ticket to impeachment for a treasonous president?

Bold: mine

post by Libertygal

I did not once say I thought he was guilty of treason

Yea, ok

Nothing like guilty till proven innocent eh? The president isn't even under investigation yet your OP already has him found guilty of Treason and you want him impeached.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 12:28 PM
reply to post by whatukno

What I want is not the topic. Please stay on topic.

I have provided a lot of information about the bill.

From the OP:

Taliban leader rejects U.S. attempts to lure away fighters with money

He was referring to the Taliban reintegration provision, part of the $680 billion defense appropriation bill that Obama signed Wednesday to pay for military operations in the 2010 fiscal year.


Obama advisers split over bribes for the Taliban

THE US President, Barack Obama, has been forced to delay the announcement of a new US strategy in Afghanistan because of disagreements inside his administration over paying "bribes" to the Taliban.

Sharp divisions have emerged over the ethics and effectiveness of paying militants to lay down their arms.

Then, later in the thread:

I posted a link to a video about the bill:
H.R.2647: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
Oct. 27, 2009 Signed by President
oct. 27, 2009 Became Public Law No: 111-84

And information naming the HR and the Public Law.

And here is the link on Thomas:

And Lois:

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 03:19 PM

Originally posted by whatukno
Sorry not buying it. While I feel that it may be improper to pay warlords to protect roads from Al Qaeda & the Taliban it's not treasonous when the money is given to people that aren't necessarily the enemy.

Like I have said before, we aren't at war with everyone in Afghanistan, just Al Qaeda & the Taliban. Now who those warlords give their money to is not our concern. We supported the Mujahadeen when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, and so we are doing it again. That was not treasonous, neither is this.

Sorry, I still fail to see how this is a treasonous action on the part of the President.

If foreign troops violently occupied the US based on what US citizens saw a lies, I think its safe to say they would be at war with "everyone" in the states.

Why are people in Afghanistan different? they dont want to saved by us, saved from us.. is more like it. The inept corrupt govt we installed is seen as a puppet.. if foreign troops installed a new US govt we'd see it the same way.

If anything the afghanis are more militant due to experience. They have a long record of fleecing clumsy dumb empires with more dollars than sense.. and using the invaders strengths against them..... they did it to the brits & soviets and they're doing it again.. with obamas help and our money.

obama is repeating history because he's not smart enough to avoid it... would you allow a surgeon to operate on you knowing s/he didn't learn a damn thing from past mistakes of other doctors?

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 03:34 PM
If no one impeached Bush and Cheney than Obama won't be impeached either!

posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 09:10 AM

Originally posted by GovtFlu

Why are people in Afghanistan different? they dont want to saved by us, saved from us.. is more like it. The inept corrupt govt we installed is seen as a puppet.. if foreign troops installed a new US govt we'd see it the same way.

from Wiki
Afghanistan has a historical and cultural connection to that of Ancient India, the Indus Valley Civilization and the sphere of the general South Asia then. The detailed history of Afghanistan begins around 330 BC with the arrival of Alexander the Great (Sikandar) and his Greek army[1] although civilization existed on the land for thousands of years.

The Afghans have been targeted for thousands of years, vis.
From the eighth century to the ninth century, many inhabitants of what is present-day Afghanistan, Pakistan, and areas of northern India were converted to Sunni Islam. In some cases, however, many people that were conquered by the Saffarids would rebel and revert to prior forms of worship.[1] The mountain areas were still not completely converted and remained largely by people of non-Muslim faiths. In a book called Hudud-al-Alam, written in 982 CE, it mentions a village near Jalalabad, Afghanistan, where the local king used to have many Hindu, Muslim and Afghan wives.[2] This indicates that the mentioned Afghans were not Hindus or Muslims.
end quote


1839 March First Anglo-Afghan War: A British expeditionary force captured Quetta.

1842 January Massacre of Elphinstone's army: A retreating British force of sixteen thousand was wiped out by the Afghans.

1879 May Second Anglo-Afghan War: To prevent British occupation of a large part of the country, the Afghan government ceded much power to the United Kingdom in the Treaty of Grandamak.

1901 August 19 Afghan Foreign Minister Mahmud Tarzi negotiated the Treaty of Rawalpindi, which fixed the Afghan-Indian border and secured Britain's recognition of Afghan independence.

1979 December 24 Soviet war in Afghanistan: Fearing the collapse of the Amin regime, the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan.

1989 February 15 Soviet war in Afghanistan: The last Soviet troops left the country.
end wiki quote

Historically the Afghans have been invaded countless times, they are a hardy people.

new topics

top topics
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in