White House: Critics of Obama Are "Serving the Goals of al Qaeda"

Yeah it is taken out of context.

He is pretty much just slamming the rampant fear mongering going on. However it is Bias still.

He fails to acknowledge his side does a lot of the fear mongering as well.

All sides are guilty of just going off the deep end. And being very misleading.

Funny I always thought since the mainstream media is the biggest mouthpiece of fear mongering, that they WERE supporting the "terrorists".

Al Qaeda is a serious problem. Sometimes we must temporarily sacrifice some of our liberties in order to preserve the rest.

[edit on 2/9/2010 by nightmarehalo]

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
reply to post by centurion1211

 

And on top of these quotes from the administration, we have obama supporters here advocating what amounts to censorship of people that they do not agree with. Sounds eerily familiar - oh, that's right dictators do that all the time ...

I don't see anyone advocating censorship.
I hope your post is not in reference to me, but since it is a direct reply to me I suppose it may be. You better clarify, because if you think that I'm an Obama supporter who advocates censorship, then I'm gonna make you look really really stupid.

What do you call asking for a user to be banned simply because you don't like what they have said?

Oh, and is that your section number on your jersey?

[edit on 2/9/2010 by centurion1211]

Pretty sure the Bush Administration had this same policy. What's new here? A cabinet claiming those who don't agree with the President are supporting terrorists.

This has been said by members of the White House for the past few years...

Another thread to show how evil Obama is, I guess.

To be clear, when Bush said "you're either with us or against us" he was speaking to NATIONS harboring terrorists, not the American people. It is so stupid when every discussion leads back to a 'well that's what Bush did' response. At least come up with some new material and get the quotes correctly in context instead of just making up false references. The White House is just getting all pissy now that they get to find out first hand how hard it is to fight while your handcuffed. The administration has been politicizing everything they can to try and gain traction before the primary season.

shouldnt this be considered a reason Obama is the worst man for the job???

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry
Another thread to show how evil Obama is, I guess.

Oh, I don't have to showcase Obama's weakness, he excels at that on his own.

I posted this thread because John Brennan is, supposedly, one of the Top Brass of Homeland Security, the department whose job it is to identify and apprehend and prosecute people who threaten America.

Right?

So, here's this John Brennan, an alleged defender of America, publicly stating that Americans are serving Al Qaeda, which would place such critics squarely in Brennan's official crosshairs.

I mean if this guy, of all people, thinks you're serving Al Qaeda, then he has every legal right to arrest your ass, right?

That's why you and everyone else should be at least a little alarmed by what this guy John Brennan is saying.

This thread isn't an indictment of how evil I think Barack Hussein Obama is — rather, it's a call for you to stop playing political bias and start listening to the fascist crap coming out of the very dangerous John Brennan's mouth.

— Doc Velocity






[edit on 2/9/2010 by Doc Velocity]

Originally posted by Doc Velocity

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry
Another thread to show how evil Obama is, I guess.

Oh, I don't have to showcase Obama's weakness, he excels at that on his own.

I posted this thread because John Brennan is, supposedly, the guy in charge of Homeland Security, the guy whose job it is to identify and apprehend and prosecute people who threaten America.

Right?

So, here's this John Brennan, an alleged defender of America, publicly stating that Americans are serving Al Qaeda, which would place such critics squarely in Brennan's official crosshairs.

I mean if this guy, of all people, thinks you're serving Al Qaeda, then he has every legal right to arrest your ass, right?

That's why you and everyone else should be at least a little alarmed by what this guy John Brennan is saying.

This thread isn't an indictment of how evil I think Barack Hussein Obama is — rather, it's a call for you to stop playing political bias and start listening to the fascist crap coming out of the very dangerous John Brennan's mouth.

— Doc Velocity





[edit on 2/9/2010 by Doc Velocity]

Hello,
I had a couple thoughts. The first as I read the article was that with all the spins happening with the MSM, I'm not being informed; How can I be sure that Al-Quaida even exists?
And to build from that thought, I came-up with this...Because I don't trust my Leaders, I'm now a member of Al-Quaida?
Well that's news to me!!!

I do not agree with the notion that to criticize or question something or someone must thereby be, automatically, to support the efforts of that thing or person's adversaries. So I must disagree with the statement at issue herein.

Just as I disagreed with President Bush's statement after 9-11:

"Let us never tolerate outrageous
conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th;
malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists,
themselves, away from the guilty."

[edit on 2/9/2010 by AceWombat04]

reply to post by Doc Velocity

For the record, my link in the OP says "Some Critics"... That's not an edit after the fact, that's how I originally linked the story.

My main headline omitted "some"... That's because I read the quotes from John Brennan before I wrote my headline and I chose to omit "Some"...The "Some Critics" headline was not what John Brennan said, the "Some Critics" was the ABC News blog headline, which was obviously attempting to downplay the import of John Brennan's remarks.

Oh so you admit to altering the name of the article to amplify your own warped perception on all this? well, at least yer admitting to it...

Brennan was talking about anybody, but particularly Washington politicians, who criticized the Obama Administration's weak efforts at national security.

he was talking about politically motivated criticisms of NS policy. You don't have to be a politician to be political. That certainly includes politicians, but it also includes people who..oh I don't know.....might say for instance, post an obviously politically motivated thread in discussion forum....know anyone who's done that recently doc?

We elected those politicians. They represent us in Washington. If Brennan is implying that our politicians are "serving Al Qaeda," then he is necessarily implying that those who elected the politicians are serving Al Qaeda, as well.

Brennan's political indictment of any Obama critics is an indictment of all Obama critics.

You can't get around it.

I can't get around the fact that this is the most failed straw grasping attempt I ever witnessed on ATS. You actually expect people to believe that Brennan is implying that citizens are are terrorists because they didn't vote democrat? You know thats absurd, come on.

Here's the mans own words....tell me how you extrapolated your warped POV from this....

Politics should never get in the way of national security. But too many in Washington are now misrepresenting the facts to score political points, instead of coming together to keep us safe.

and then at the end....

Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda.

he's at least half right i think, al qaeda does want us to live in fear.

I dont get how any of what he said means that our elected officials are serving al qaeda. He's simply saying that criticizing NS policy creates fear in people and thats exactly what al qaeda wants.

reply to post by Doc Velocity

Brennan dares not "name names" because, then, he's playing the same "politically-motivated criticism" of which he is accusing others.

so you're saying he's consistent and not a total hypocrite?

Like it or not, in taking his argument to the Opinions & Editorial pages of USA Today, John Brennan is lashing out at anyone who criticizes this administration's national security efforts.

I think it's pretty obvious that he's referring to politically charged criticisms, or rants that portray a gratuitous level of fear. For instance, I don't think he's upset about people saying...hey WTF, how did that dude get into the country with bombs in his pants. I think what he's talking about is more like...Hey WTF, the republicans would have never let that guy in the country. You libs are gonna get us all killed, and why are you reading him his rights??!

Why, if this is aimed only at Washington insiders — presumably, Congressionally-seated critics — did John Brennan not take his case before the U.S. Senate and address those mean old critics face-to-face? If this is only about Washington insiders, why did Brennan not make his appeal only in a Washington publication, such as the Times or the Post?

get real....like the senate would just let him stop by and waste their time addressing critics who may or may not be in the senate anyways. I don't think he picked a bad forum, and I don't know why he picked USA today. Maybe he thought it was a relevant subject for all american, or maybe he has a connection down there, maybe he's on good terms with them? You keep tryin to find reasons for why any of this is ridiculous, but nothing really holds water....what exactly is it about the brennan article that you find noteworthy or upsetting...do you even know anymore?

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
Oh so you admit to altering the name of the article to amplify your own warped perception on all this? well, at least yer admitting to it...

I'm not "admitting" to anything. I always tell the Truth, that's how I roll. If you're offended by the Truth, you need to work on your own misperceptions of the world.

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
You don't have to be a politician to be political. That certainly includes politicians, but it also includes people who..oh I don't know.....might say for instance, post an obviously politically motivated thread in discussion forum....know anyone who's done that recently doc?

Yes, me, but I've been doing this same sort of writing for 25 years, through 5 administrations, and I know the danger of speaking the truth in an atmosphere saturated with lies — I accept the responsibility and I don't fear the consequences.

In any event, you just made my case for me that any American who voices political dissent is in danger of being targeted by Homeland Security. Are you listening to yourself?

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
You actually expect people to believe that Brennan is implying that citizens are are terrorists because they didn't vote democrat?

I never said nor implied any such thing. Now who's attempting to distort and derail the issue?

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
Here's the mans own words....tell me how you extrapolated your warped POV from this....

Politics should never get in the way of national security. But too many in Washington are now misrepresenting the facts to score political points, instead of coming together to keep us safe... Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda.

I dont get how any of what he said means that our elected officials are serving al qaeda.

I've already addressed this, but apparently you missed it.

WHO is "too many in Washington"? Hmm. As opposed to "just enough" people in Washington, I suppose? John Brennan is uncomfortable with criticism, that's the long and the short of it. He has no right and no authority to quell political dissent in America.

If "too many in Washington" are criticizing our National Security efforts — or lack of effort — then it's up to John Brennan to get off his ass and effect changes at Homeland Security.

It's not his right nor his job to publicly announce that too many people are criticizing this administration (wahh!) He needs to shut up and do his job and do a better job, so the Obama administration doesn't appear to be such an assemblage of amateurish oafs.

— Doc Velocity

Lets see

Conservatives hate Obama more than they Love America


Yeah...i could see where the white house could validate some of those comments

Originally posted by Snarf
Yeah...i could see where the white house could validate some of those comments

So Jon Stewart (an entertainer) mocks Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity (more entertainers).

I don't get how entertainers mocking one another constitutes anything of political importance.

— Doc Velocity

reply to post by nightmarehalo

Al Qaeda is a serious problem. Sometimes we must temporarily sacrifice some of our liberties in order to preserve the rest.

Thats a pretty scary perspective. How does the old quote go? He who would give up freedom for security deserves neither.

Maybe you should grow some grapefruits.


reply to post by centurian1211

What do you call asking for a user to be banned simply because you don't like what they have said?

Oh, and is that your section number on your jersey?

I didn't like what he said because he purposely took things out of context to push his own warped political point of view. It's not his opinion i have a problem with its his misrepresentation of the facts which would appear to have been on purpose. I don't know if you can be banned for that but you should be. I guess you missed my explanation right in the thread, you also seem to have missed my disclaimer in my first post, as predicted in the disclaimer.


Whats wrong centurian, too distracted by petty meaningless things like my avatar? You're actually less like fish in a barrel and more like my lab rat.

Who's next?


reply to post by Jnewell33

To be clear, when Bush said "you're either with us or against us" he was speaking to NATIONS harboring terrorists, not the American people.

yeah but that was still a really stupid quote on his part.
and the previous admin definitely tried to accuse people of embolding the enemy..
Bush charges Kerry with emboldening the enemy
They in fact thought many criticisms of the war emboldened the enemy. I seem to remember them freaking out about pictures of caskets coming home to, they said that would embolden the enemy. There is no right and left, when are you guys gonna get that? They all say the same stuff. Why you think it's different I'll never know....

reply to post by Doc Velocity

 

Oh doc.....

So, here's this John Brennan, an alleged defender of America, publicly stating that Americans are serving Al Qaeda, which would place such critics squarely in Brennan's official crosshairs.

Thats not what he said, you know that, we've been over this....

I mean if this guy, of all people, thinks you're serving Al Qaeda, then he has every legal right to arrest your ass, right?

I should hope so, but he's not gonna think that just cuz you say the administration is bad at national security. Thats totally ridiculous, totally twisting his words and taking them out of context, and this whole thread is obviously politically motivated on your part.

This thread isn't an indictment of how evil I think Barack Hussein Obama is — rather, it's a call for you to stop playing political bias and start listening to the fascist crap coming out of the very dangerous John Brennan's mouth.

please...no one buys that doc. stop insulting us.

Yes, me, but I've been doing this same sort of writing for 25 years, through 5 administrations, and I know the danger of speaking the truth in an atmosphere saturated with lies — I accept the responsibility and I don't fear the consequences.

In any event, you just made my case for me that any American who voices political dissent is in danger of being targeted by Homeland Security. Are you listening to yourself?

you haven't told the truth bro, you've misrepresented and even changed brennans quotes to suit your needs...IF, homeland security can arrest you for making a simple criticism then it's not an issue regarding this administration. Bush was taking just as many of your rights away, and set the stage for this type of free speech lock down that you erroneously think is happening. BUT, thats not what brennan said or even implied...you've had to be pretty creative to get to what you're saying from what he said...

I never said nor implied any such thing. Now who's attempting to distort and derail the issue?

yes you did...look...
YOUR WORDS:

We elected those politicians. They represent us in Washington. If Brennan is implying that our politicians are "serving Al Qaeda," then he is necessarily implying that those who elected the politicians are serving Al Qaeda, as well.

try and follow me...I'll you understand YOUR OWN WORDS...the politicians that criticize are generally not democrat, so the people that voted for them did not vote democrat. The politicians that criticize are serving al qaeda, therefor the people who elected them who did not vote democrat are also serving the enemy.

WHO is "too many in Washington"? Hmm. As opposed to "just enough" people in Washington, I suppose? John Brennan is uncomfortable with criticism, that's the long and the short of it. He has no right and no authority to quell political dissent in America.

who cares who who is? he was making a general statement, who cares? maybe he is uncomfortable with criticism, who cares? Of course he has no right, but he has a right to state his opinion in an opposing view piece.

If "too many in Washington" are criticizing our National Security efforts — or lack of effort — then it's up to John Brennan to get off his ass and effect changes at Homeland Security.

NO IT ISN'T. Thats exactly what brennan is saying, he doesn't need politically charged criticisms from people in washington. He seems to think we doing just fine in regards to national security and the criticisms are unfounded. This isnt rocket science bro...just read that mans words and make an honest comment.

Who would of guessed this guy with no prior leadership abilities would have a hard time? Since he isn't a viable president, anyone covering for him should be shot for treason. He, his excellency should be put in stocks, and we could have a live internet feed 24/7 so we can watch him being humiliated.

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
you haven't told the truth bro, you've misrepresented and even changed brennans quotes to suit your needs... thats not what brennan said or even implied...you've had to be pretty creative to get to what you're saying from what he said...

Show me where I've taken any of this "out of context"... Show me where I've "changed Brennan's quotes" — which is a goddamned lie on your part.

Brennan said what he said — I've published his quotes verbatim and provided links to them. I responded to his statements. Now you're responding to me by calling me a liar, which is a personal attack that you can't back up.

In short, your mouth is writing checks that your ass can't cash.

I'm not saying what you want to hear, which you seem to think is a bannable offense. Fortunately, you're not an elected official nor even a person of influence, or else I'd take your petulant accusations more seriously.

— Doc Velocity

reply to post by oppaperclip


Hi, care to comment on the thread?
Oh couldn't think of anything with substance or even remotely on topic?
Oh well, nice try.
Better luck next time.

reply to post by Doc Velocity


White House: Critics of Obama Are "Serving the Goals of al Qaeda

Technically we the people could say the same thing

If I were to think about what serves Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda I think these simple things and how it gives them exactly what they want:

Taking away the freedom, liberty and privacy of a Nation by enacting new laws of control, oppression of travel and constant surveillance on every corner, every road and in every place of business.

Bankrupt that free Nation through intentional never ending wars, intentional banking/financial trouble, socialism, breaking the economy and taking away the jobs in order to silence the middle class voice and vote that was strong before 9/11

A nation brought to fear, taking their strength with never ending admissions of threats, color levels for the threats, and constant news/media propaganda stating those threats

Reverse the blame and face of terrorism onto the American people -
It would seem more and more that the profile of terrorism has shifted off of the Middle East and its rogue terror cells - and terror has now become everyday American's who are disgusted by the direction they have taken our country. You know: Those who still believe in the Constitution, bearing arms, elections, jobs, non-socialist states!

We are not the enemy, maybe those claiming we are - ARE!

Obama continues the same road to bankrupting the United States by allowing the wars in the Middle East to continue

By sending our able bodied service men and woman to fight a never ending war that never brings peace or a so called democracy - instead of having them here, at home, defending our Nation and borders from within

He is hell bent on cramming social programs down our throats like the national healthcare bill, which will also further the debt and destroy us from the inside out

What about the lies of more transparency and the fact that everything is decided on behind closed doors - that is not a government for and by the people

I can go on and on, but it is clear that the enemy is clearly within - and it is not the people, it is the very people in Washington designing these laws to label anyone a threat or terrorist

We the people are not the problem, and very soon an election will show the problem by the removal of those who keep destroying us 4 years at a time!

reply to post by Doc Velocity


I wonder how deep this can get. I had called the White House to inform them that although I had voted for Obama his lack of courage and strength had caused me to assess that I would not vote for him again.

Would not voting for his Regalness cause me to be listed on the enemy subversive list? Is this a political statement.

Every statement is a political statement.

The whole process of determining who should be on your enemy list is a radical change from inviting everyone into the tent. I thoroughly despise many of the policies being continued by the current administration which were designed by neocons.

I want peace and I want it now. I want our freedoms perpetuated and not diminished. I am not against taxes. I just want these first two items prior to my being pounded.

Peace and Freedom. I wonder why they can't co-exist?

Oh yeah! Conspiracies!



[edit on 9-2-2010 by largo]