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: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 03:48 PM
reply to post by Mythtified

This is true, but in order to get to the puppet master(s), one has to snip the strings to reveal what's hidden behind the curtain. I know most of us here on ATS know who these puppet masters are, but the majority of the populous are still in the dark and they'll need to see whats hiding behind the curtain for themselves before they are awakened.

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 03:50 PM

Originally posted by mahajohn
Look, impeachment morons

I share your feelings as well, however I don't think that's a good way to make your point.

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 03:50 PM
reply to post by piddles

The two letters are all that is required. I didn't put it there, I simply quoted the source, got a problem with that, write Fox.

So how about staying on topic? This has nothing to do with Fox, other than being where the article came from, and seriously, add to the topic, please.

And no, it isn't all I have, but it is all I have for you.

Feel free to take the hate elsewhere.

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 03:57 PM
Apparently obama never once heard of the flawed concept of allowing the fox to guard the hens.. I guess obama thinks paying the fox chump change will make the fox less of a fox, and more like a golden


Want to buy US military wares in Afghanistan? Go to Obama Market. Afghanistan vendors in the 'Obama Market' in Kabul sell MREs, military cots, and goggles like those used by the American military. It's not clear where they come from, but the Otis Spunkmeyer cookies are popular.

"Most of the shopkeepers and customers still call it the Bush Market"

American Weapons in the Hands of the Taliban
A check of 30 magazines taken from the dead insurgents' rifles found that at least 17 held ammunition that bore the distinctive factory stamps of U.S. suppliers in California and the Czech Republic.

Military investigators later discovered a local police chief had helped carry out the attack. At his police post, they found a cache of more than 70 assault rifles that were probably U.S.-supplied.

U.S. supply convoy hijacked Militants steal Humvees, water tank trailers

Exclusive: In the wrong hands The U.S. struggle to keep the Taliban from stealing what's inside this box.

I was recently able to purchase a U.S. military laptop for $650 from a small kiosk, which is known as the “Sitara Market,” on the western edge of the sprawling open-air markets on the edge of Peshawar. The laptop, which has clear U.S. military markings and serial numbers, contained restricted U.S. military information, as well as software for military platforms, the identities of numerous military personnel and information about weaknesses and flaws in American military vehicles being employed in the war in Afghanistan.

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 03:59 PM
reply to post by BetweenTheLine

And thats why we have agencies compartmentalized to handle this stuff without us knowing.

The ONLY reason to compartmentalize is to hide LIES.

We all do it, within our own thinking.

If the taliban really where getting paid they would not put it out in the air like this

Are you sure?

Define "Taliban" if you would please.

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 03:59 PM
reply to post by Libertygal


Paying off local insurgents and warlords has been SOP in both wars since nearly their inception. Billions of dollars were shipped to Iraq under the Idiot Child Emperor's Reign. Now that Obama's proving himself to be another dumb puppet on the same strings as W we suddenly remember that giving money to the bad guys is a bad thing.

I don't condone the practice, and I am no particular fan of Obama, but I can't help but wonder who the IMPEACH!!!! Crowd thinks is going to step up and do anything better or different.

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 04:03 PM
Clinton went through the "impeachment thing" also and it changed nothing. I see this as just another headline that will fade as quickly as it reared it's ugly head.

If Obama gets impeached the LA riots would look like a boy scout brawl.

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 04:03 PM
reply to post by Libertygal

wow, I make a response to you being condescending and now I'm derailing the thread?

What, is it because you don't have a reply? "o no stop derailing my thread you 1 person who probably isn't going to post enough to derail this thread lol"

whatever, don't care anymore.

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 04:11 PM
reply to post by piddles

Took me 3 minutes of searching to find the story on AP.
Dec 17, 9:15 AM EST

Congress opens probe into Afghan trucking contract

Associated Press Writer

Me being condescending? Seems you are the one who attacked the poster for posting a Fox News article, when it turns out it was probably purchased by Fox from the AP.

Then you attacked again when I pointed this out, proclaiming, "How was I suuposed to know this was from the AP Two little letters?!"

Point being, you came in slinging, and I will hand it right back, but I wish to not derail the thread into that.

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 04:14 PM
reply to post by henriquefd

Now let me start by saying, I have just as much of an issue with TPTB as the next ATSer. That being said, there are a variety of issues this new prez has lied about or simply been shady about that would be grounds for this sort of criticism. It isnt always about the $. Personally, if I was stationed at one of those bases and had the task of making it through that supply route, I would rest so much easier at night knowing that our safety was guaranteed. As corrupt as it is, it isnt always about how much it would cost to send more troops to patrol, sometimes its about the lives of our soldiers. You cant put a price on that

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 04:32 PM

Originally posted by AlienChaser
reply to post by henriquefd

The issue is, what happens when we stop paying these elements to be on "our side"? Will they simply stay on the side they are used too, or will they go where the money is?

Insurgents have families, and they love them just as anyone. I believe they will follow the path that offers the most money and protection for their families, and that whatever "ideals" they hold will be second to that.

You only keep paying while you're still getting what you're paying for and while you still need it. Whoever is paying knows that better than you and me. The day they decide they dont need to pay those road bandits anymore, they stop paying and just kill them if they cause any trouble.

Look, maybe I have a different perspective because I am used to corruption. It's part of my daily life. I run a company that is hired by city governments to, say, put some order in the house. Since politicians often get ellected by their charisma rather than by their skills, they often make a mess with their finances. So, we get hired to help them find companies that are not paying their taxes properly and to calculate how much tax they own the government. We also help them get the right ammount of royalties from Oil production in their city territoty.

Almost 100% of my contracts, I get from indication by another politician. He indicates me... for a price. And after I get indicated and pay the price, then I have to talk to the Mayor.

I had a mayor looking me straight in the eye and asking for 50% of my contract as a condition to hire me. Do you know what I told him? Exactly. I closed the deal on 15%!

It happens every single day everywhere. The world runs on corruption. You pay to get what you want. Nothing is for free. It's one big dirty game.

So I'm not worried about that. Ok, not fair, since I am brazilian and not a US citizen. But even if I were, i wouldnt be worried. To me that's nothing but politics. Obama did it, and so did all the presidents before him and all the presidents after him will do it as well.

Look, the opposition has to play their part and put on the MSM anything dirty they can find about the governmenr so they can use it 4 years latter at the next election. I doubt Obama will be impeached. Maybe if he was paying Monica Lewinsky instead of those road bandits... =P

[edit on 17-12-2009 by henriquefd]

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 04:49 PM
reply to post by henriquefd

So okay, you explained how things "work" in your business, but let me ask you this. Do you openly have contracts detailing payoffs? If you got caught, could you get in trouble?

Seems to be two schools of thought on this thread so far. One is saying, it is modus operendi, no biggie, the other is in agreement that this is disgusting.

Does making it written change what it is? Just because one administration does it, that makes it okay? I keep asking the same things, but serisouly, when is someone going to step up and say this type of thing has to stop, because it is dirty? Isn't this what people thought they bought when they voted a year ago?

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 04:51 PM
reply to post by WhiteDevil013


Edit: Sorry, I re-read your opinions and felt that my rebuttal was slightly off topic. We agree, mostly!

[edit on 12/17/2009 by AlienChaser]

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 04:58 PM
I would say this is not Treasonous act as it is immoral, and it is definately something that could come back to bite the US federal government on the rear in the long run. The only reason why I say it is not a treasonous act, is that there was never a declaration of war that was approved by the US congress. By not declaring it a war, and putting the suspects of 9/11 in a civil criminal court, pretty much kills the treason charges outright.

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:03 PM
The will to impeach is jut not there just like it's not there for succession and a real investigation into the torture program if anything the threat of impeachment against Obama will be used to voice the frustrations of the extreme left but other then that it's not gonna amount to much.

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:05 PM

Originally posted by Libertygal

Congress Probes Alleged U.S. Bribes to Afghan Warlords

Okay...and?..Does the US Military/Special Forces and CIA bribe local tribes?
Yes. Yes. Yes. Ever since day one of the invasion. Well documented...not an eye opener for anyone. We paid for prisoners, we paid for information and we buy alliegences from various tribes for many purposes.

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.

This is where the looney train goes off the tracks...

If we are going to prosecute the paying of bribes in afghanistan...everyone from troops to generals to special ops to CIA officers to the CIA Director ...thousands of people....are all going to jail before it is laid at the feet of the current POTUS.

We pay bribes...we have done it from day one in Afghanistan and Iraq...long before what you believe to be a "closet terrorist" got into office.

Lord knows we did it in Viet Nam.....

If President Obama is personally authorizing bribes because of a secret "muslim" "Kenyan" "Terrorist" agenda...then what is Italys excuse?

The Times (UK) broke a story charging that the Italian secret service had been systematically paying off the Taliban in exchange for protection in the Italian army’s area of operation

When the French took over that same territory in Afghanistan from the Italians... were they upset when they discovered the Italians were paying bribes?

They were upset they weren't given the details so they could continue the payments...

“One cannot be too doctrinaire about these things,” a senior Nato officer in Kabul said. “It might well make sense to buy off local groups and use non-violence to keep violence down. But it is madness to do so and not inform your allies.”

Ditto the Canadian Government and the Germans

One Western military source told of payments made by Canadian soldiers stationed in the violent southern province of Kandahar, while another officer spoke of similar practices by the German army in northern Kunduz.

"I can tell you that lots of countries under the NATO umbrella operating out in rural parts of Afghanistan do pay the militants for not attacking them," the senior Afghan official said.

The most shocking thing in your story is the fact that the Obama Adminstration was unhappy enough about it to begin an administrative debate into the ethics of it.

We pay do the Canadians, Germans, French, Italians etc. etc.

Your eagerness to somehow hop-skip to impeachment of the POTUS is ignorance.

It's called War. Money has a lot to do with it.

[edit on 17-12-2009 by maybereal11]

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:05 PM

Originally posted by henriquefd
I'm not republican nor democrat. Actually, I'm brazilian and couldn't care less for Obama or whoever is the next US president.

But I think the post is self explanatory. If bribing the road bandits, be them taliban or not, is the most cost-effective strategy, that means it'd good for the US. Otherwise they would have to spend a LOT more money deploying soldiers to secure the roads.

It's war and it's a dirty game. Do what you have to do to win. If that means feeding the pigs before slaughtering them, so be it. That looks more like politics than anything else. The opposition poking the government in the ribs.

I don't like our president, lula. But sometimes the opposition gets too blind in their political schemes and lose sight that some attacks on the president are not very intelligent because the consequences are costly for the country.

Lets suppose Obama gets impeached and the next president decides not to pay the road bandits anymore. In the middle of this economical crysis the new president would have to spend A LOT MORE MONEY to deploy soldiers to secure all the roads to safely send the supplies to the camps stationed in those regions. Now, we could just say its cheaper to call back all the troops and not get involved anymore in the middle east, but we have to be realistic. Not gonna happen.

This is the best post on the entire thread....

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:11 PM
Plausible Deniabilty. No chance of Impeachment proceedings, IMO. Wishfull thinking on the part of the OP.

My first thought after reading the post and article was; Does this mean that if I buy something from someone or pay for services rendered and they turn around and give it to terrorists, does this make me a traitor?

I realize that is an over-simplification but.... I'm just sayin'.

Of course if the Administration is aware of the money trail and continues to payout... well... that's a whole 'nuther story...

[edit on 17-12-2009 by Anamnesis]

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:11 PM
TO LYBERTY GAL (sorry, still new here and learning all the buttons =P)

I agree with you about it being morally wrong. I'm not saying it is right.

And I think every US citizen has the right to question those actions. But I think it is also good to see those actions from all angles. Is it illegal? Yes. Morally wrong? Yes. Why do it then? There must be a reason. I dont think they would do it just for the kick of it. Why do it then? Is that really the best course of action? They are saying it is the most cost-effective way to get those supplies to the troops. If that turns out to be true, we have to try decide. Should we do it anyway, or should we try something else? What is the cost of trying something else?

Supposed the alternative that is politically correct is NOT cost-effective. Suppose it would cost a lot more and you would have to mobilise troops there just to safeguard the roads, instead of mobilising them to fight Iran or whatever....

What would you do? It must not be easy to be a president, let alone the president of United States, since US has its finger on everything all over the globe!

Do you know what Lula, our president, said a few weeks ago? Something in the lines of, If Jesus was the President of Brazil, he would have to close deals with Judas.

Anyway, just finishing my point of view since I dont think I have anything new to add to this. That's my two cents. Peace!

[edit on 17-12-2009 by henriquefd]

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:12 PM

I really think you should go to Afghanistan and stand up for our liberty. It's times like these where we need honest, uncorrupted individuals to take a stand against tyranny. You should apply for a job at a government contractor and iron fist your way into the insides of this corrupt leadership of the POTUS. We need brave women who don't hide behind their keyboards professing adulation for the sacrifice of others. WE NEED STRONG WOMEN WHO DO AS THEY SAY. Go to Afghanistan. Weed out the corruption. Do it. You are the enlightened one to lead us all to true liberty.

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in