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.

 

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

page: 7
70
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   
If Obama is a traitor... Understand who has propped him up to be one? The man is one person... he is NOT a General, a banker or a Rockefeller...

The sheer strategic tactic has been endorsed 1000 times by the over lords of the US Military Complex --- here enlies your treason.

Just another well placed meal for the sheep.




posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anamnesis
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]


I think in your version, of course you would have been an unwitting participant.

I do not buy the unwitting argument in this article, which is why I posted supporting links.

If they were unwitting, then why did they make it law in a spending bill? Why did they actually make payoff contracts? The whole unwitting thing doesn't wash, and that is where I feels it is a difference.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by henriquefd
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]



That's all well and good. But how exactly is that going to get Obama impeached? That's all this topic is about isn't it? We don't care if what he does has been done by his predecessors. We have an agenda against the POTUS and we need any excuse necessary to take him out. He's the anti-christ, they said it another thread. I totally believe it too. He's running this country into the ground. He's corrupt and he was elected illegally by the ghostly hands. There's proof everywhere!!! I am against government funding for abortion. I stand for LIBERTY!!!



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:28 PM
link   
Does anyone know what happened with the General ___ in Tennessee who went to Grand Jury charging Obama with treason? Last I heard he was going before the local grand jury. Never heard outcome...



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by zz0409
 


I think the liberal media silenced him like they do with every other righteous bastion of truth. Proof is in my declaration. Trust me. Liberty for all!!!



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Ops there is are change in are face. O crap I voted for change,some one get out the cat-o-nines,I'm in need of a flogging.
Of course I knew all the promises were a bunch of lies, but I wanted to believe. snap Don't know if this was all ready brought up, I jumped to the end to post, but he"potus" just kissed the ass of big pharma, so we Americans can pay big bucks for are meds instead of getting them on the cheap from other countries. God #&%@ I'm so pissed I can't stand my self, well I am locked and loaded and just can't wait for the movement to catch fire. Time to go back to military/weapons threads and sign up for the coming boy scout retreat.
Buy the way this is IMHO,but I'm just about tired of being humble. Have a nice day.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Libertygal

Originally posted by Anamnesis
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]


I think in your version, of course you would have been an unwitting participant.

I do not buy the unwitting argument in this article, which is why I posted supporting links.

If they were unwitting, then why did they make it law in a spending bill? Why did they actually make payoff contracts? The whole unwitting thing doesn't wash, and that is where I feels it is a difference.



All moneys spent by the Fed. Gov. are outlined in either the Federal budget or Appropriations Bills... so nothing fishy there.

Unfortunately, it would probably be impossible to prove knowledge of the money trail's final destination. The burden of proof rests with the prosecutor, not the defendant.

Luckily we don't impeach the POTUS based on "feelings". So it soesn't matter if anyone feels like it doesn't wash, proof is needed.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by dirtydog
Ops there is are change in are face. O crap I voted for change,some one get out the cat-o-nines,I'm in need of a flogging.
Of course I knew all the promises were a bunch of lies, but I wanted to believe. snap Don't know if this was all ready brought up, I jumped to the end to post, but he"potus" just kissed the ass of big pharma, so we Americans can pay big bucks for are meds instead of getting them on the cheap from other countries. God #&%@ I'm so pissed I can't stand my self, well I am locked and loaded and just can't wait for the movement to catch fire. Time to go back to military/weapons threads and sign up for the coming boy scout retreat.
Buy the way this is IMHO,but I'm just about tired of being humble. Have a nice day.



I agree. The failure of the health plan has nothing to do with the Republican leadership who stands opposed to socialization. It really all was an evil plot hatched by Obama and his cronies to skyrocket the cost of medical care at the expense of the populace. Socialized medicine is in the hip pocket of the insurance companies. It always has been and it always will be. Just look at Canada, France, Australia, and Great Britain. They all pay through the roof because their leaders were for socialized medicine. Thank god for our Republican leadership that we don't have to go down that path of futility. Man, what would we do without great Republican leadership? Liberty!!! Impeach the treasonous dictator who was installed by the ghostly hands!!!



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Libertygal
 


Wait for it...

Wait for it...

Started under Bush.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Angus123
 


Has that not gotten old? Seriously I am waiting for that "change" that was promised
Time to shut up or cash out!



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Angus123
reply to post by Libertygal
 


Wait for it...

Wait for it...

Started under Bush.



What? Do you really think Libertgirl was starting threads calling for the impeachment of Bush? She totally was. This isn't some newfound bias towards the POTUS that she has found . She has always been against Bush and she never,ever supported the invasion of Iraq or Afganistan. She is perfectly innocent and trustworthy because she has always towed the line against tryanny.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:52 PM
link   
This is just stupid. It sounds like a steaming pile of poop, and everybody somethings need to be done illegally. Sounds to me like they didn't want the US Army to be weakened, so they paid some money. I don't see how that is treason.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   
Well this is quite interesting, I wish I could have been up to par with my information or I would have come out with this sooner. While not in Afghanistan specifically, this does hold true in Iraq according to my sources.

A friend of mine in the National Guard was deployed to Iraq from February til October. He called me numerous times while over there and I asked him about what he was doing and all that. While he didn't say much as he was in charge of a weapons depot he did mention a few times he went out and what their objective was. Turns out his unit was in charge of exchanging money with the local leaders in there area for protection with the promise that their people wouldn't cause any trouble. He mentioned 2 or 3 such missions he went on and how the exchange of money took place with the Iraqi "fat cats".

I don't know if this information will help to push this along, but the more the better I say. Pieces start to pull together nicely.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 06:05 PM
link   
If paying bribes is illegal -- then it is illegal! Like waterboarding. It was decided illegal, so had to stop.

It is big deal if knowingly sending money to enemy.

Makes me sick how TPTB have so little respect for loosing lives to fight for ___ ?



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


We won't be able to actually Impeach Obama until November 2010.
The GOP needs to regain control of the House of Representatives.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by AlienChaser

If the Democrats where capable of leading according to the will of the people there would be no worries for them, and the same holds true for the Republicans.

That got you a star.


That's all I am saying; it's not about Democrat vs. Republican. Although such strife does of course exist, it is lower-level bickering as opposed to true national or global conspiracy. In this case, what we have is not even following the party line. It is more about Obama being attacked by his own party. That in itself tells me there is more to this than meets the eye.

The polarity I mentioned is, IMO, more of a confusion among the people than anything else. It;s not about Bush, or Obama, nor even about Republicans or Democrats. It's more about the country needing someone, anyone to stand up and be a statesman instead of a politician. That's the kind of change we need. That's a change we can believe in. The question is who can provide the change and which direction should that change be in. As long as we continue to blame past administrations, we will continue to receive the same old partisan football-fan style politics.

I have to admit you make an excellent point about people 'rooting for the 'underdog'. That is a theory I had not considered. I don't think that could explain the extreme polarity that exists in American politics, however.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrath5639
very interesting post. I think we all knew that Obama was up to no good, now apparently he's just stopped caring about hiding it.


Please don't speak for me... We all don't know that he's up to no good. Speak for yourself or not at all.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 06:39 PM
link   
I just want to say that I suspect they are bribing them, as others have said its the most cost and life effective method.

But why Im replying is because it isnt Obama who invaded Afghanistan and started all this, it was Bush. If this is going on you can bet your arse it has been going on for a very long time.

Now I dont have a problem with it either way but certainly its not something which the president is directly responsible for I very much doubt it will lead to his impeachment.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Libertygal
reply to post by mrsoul2009
 


Then don't. Move along. Why did you even post here if you have nothing to add? This isn't about Bush, so please, stay on topic.


I post here because I'm interested in intelligent ideas and opinions - not political partisan tea-party nonsense. Excuse me for not suffering fools.

Sorry darling but this has everything to do about Bush. Spare me the wave of your hand. Tell the soldiers that have been injured and maimed in the Afghan conflict that this has nothing to do with Bush..

Read the article. It says nothing about treason and impeachment - just the rantings of another Obama hater. I guarantee you that if Obama had decided to pull out all the troops (as I think he should) and redeploy our forces here at home - that he would be branded as a coward and accused of "cutting and running." Frankly some people are just going to be against whatever the guy does. Take the story for what it is - a continuation of the same tactics used in the Iraq surge - and spare me the treason and impeachment talk.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Obama is using a tactic that was developed and used by GEN Patreus in Iraq long before Obama became president, and without Bush's knowledge. GEN Patreaus has testified to this and spoken about it in interviews. He paid Sadr's militia off, and he paid off other militias/groups, groups who sympathized/supported AQ in Iraq. This worked. It increased our intelligence gathering capabilities and the amount of time that we needed to both capitalize on that intelligence and, actually, imrove relations with those groups whose loyalties were not clearly defined... It started under Bush, it worked, and it could work again...




top topics



 
70
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join