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.

 

Woodward: White House Warned Me "You Will Regret Doing This"

page: 7
88
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by WillowWisp
 

Absolutely Ma'am that would be Benghazi,he is looking into that as well.




posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by starfoxxx

When you WRITE for a LIVING. you CHOOSE your WORDS VERY carefully...

When this nut job in the white house under Obama's control went out and told Woodward he is going to Regret what he is doing is a double edged sword..


OK then how about you follow your own advice? Pay attention to actual words?

The advisor to the economic council doesn't neccessarily "write for living"...Woodward does.

But from his email...



White House economic adviser Gene Sperling to Woodward:

I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today. I do understand your problems with a couple of our statements in the fall -- but feel on the other hand that you focus on a few specific trees that gives a very wrong perception of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here. But I do truly believe you should rethink your comment about saying saying that Potus asking for revenues is moving the goal post. I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim ... My apologies again for raising my voice on the call with you. Feel bad about that and truly apologize.


He didn't tell woodward "he is going to Regret what he is doing"...he didn't tell him to stop asking questions...he cited a specific claim that he thought woodward was wrong about..

"CHOOSE your WORDS VERY carefully"!

Also...most people making threats don't effusively apologize for thier behavior in the same breath.

But hey...you are welcome to your opinion...



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


Well Woodward is quite gullible as his take on George W. Bush shows:

Woodward spent more time than any other journalist with former president George W. Bush, interviewing him six times for close to 11 hours total.[11] Woodward's four books, Bush at War (2002), Plan of Attack (2004), State of Denial (2006), and The War Within: A Secret White House History (2006–2008) (2008) are detailed accounts of the Bush presidency, including the response to the September 11 attacks and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In a series of articles published in January 2002, he and Dan Balz described the events at Camp David in the aftermath of September 11 and discussed the Worldwide Attack Matrix.
Woodward believed the Bush administration's claims of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction prior to the war. During an appearance on Larry King Live, he was asked by a telephone caller, "Suppose we go to war and go into Iraq and there are no weapons of mass destruction," Woodward responded "I think the chance of that happening is about zero. There's just too much there."

Also this involving the Plame scandal:
New York University professor Jay Rosen severely criticized Woodward for allegedly being co-opted by the Bush White House and also for not telling the truth about his role in the Plame affair, writing: "Not only is Woodward not in the hunt, but he is slowly turning into the hunted. Part of what remains to be uncovered is how Woodward was played by the Bush team, and what they thought they were doing by leaking to him, as well as what he did with the dubious information he got."


So it seems Woodward is a Bush Admin. patsy, made to discredit Democrats at any cost and forward the "right" agenda. If this was someone from the left it would be a bit more believable, that and he seems to look to make money anytime he seems to have a new "opinion". So in short get ready for his new book it's coming and will probably sell for a cheap $30. He also made quite a buck off of Watergate and most likely only threw those guys under the bus because they were there to begin with.
edit on 28-2-2013 by NoJoker13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 

We really can't be sure that this email covers what had the Obama camp was PO'ed about.

I kind of think it was the part about saying that the POTUS is mad.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5


Hmmm...So a poster explains that they want to see the actual email before comming to a conclusion...

And for that preference to reserve judgement and examine the factual evidence before comming to a conclusion..

You label that poster an "Obama apologist and enabler" ???

That might sum up well what is wrong with ATS.
So the email is here, Woodward told the truth!!!

When you WRITE for a LIVING. you CHOOSE your WORDS VERY carefully...

When this nut job in the white house under Obama's control went out and told Woodward he is going to Regret what he is doing is a double edged sword..

You can take it both ways and the nutjob threatening Woodward knows that.

When I say something listen...



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5


But hey...you are welcome to your opinion...


Your DAMN RIGHT I am, so is Woodward!! He took it as a threat as well as I HAVE... Which if you addressed the actual post
I told you IT CAN be taken EITHER WAY when you tell someone "YOUR GOING TO REGRET WHAT YOUR DOING". The NUT JOB writing his little e-mail to Woodward KNOWS THAT..
edit on 28-2-2013 by starfoxxx because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by starfoxxx
 


Do journalists choose their words very carefully? Then what say you of this: Woodward believed the Bush administration's claims of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction prior to the war. During an appearance on Larry King Live, he was asked by a telephone caller, "Suppose we go to war and go into Iraq and there are no weapons of mass destruction," Woodward responded "I think the chance of that happening is about zero. There's just too much there."

He chose those words "very" carefully... I'm sure he thought that all the way through.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Glinda
 


If I am not mistaken, that unnamed official in the DHS has been named,
and has resigned. That had to be one of the most idioitic reactions I could imagine,
sure yeah lets just let some illegals out of jail to provoke the public and get them
angered up at the Republicans, because everyone knows it could not be Obamas doing.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Bilk22
 


Yes, and funny that you mention that. The Atlantic just last week popped something up
to that end....this was about the same time Politico turned on too...

Would You Empower President Obama to Kill With His Mind?


Imagine that President Obama is visited by aliens who give him the power to kill any human being with his mind. Simply by willing it, he can bring about his or her violent death, as if by a tiny missile. Alternatively, he can kill inconspicuously, so that the target appears to die from an aneurism, a heart attack, a stroke, or any number of other "natural causes" that he can vary as he sees fit. He is limited only insofar as he can kill just one person at a time, which takes roughly two minutes.

The power would expire at the end of his term.

Would that be a good thing?



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Yeah, I'll reserve judgement until I see those emails, too.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Yes, I was wondering about that last night, how many other journalists have been
intimidated. As someone said, it was Helious that these are the signs of a dictatorship.

I hope they all step forward, safety in numbers.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 



I thought Woodward himself released the emails?

And though I know it will, as always, rankle a certain segment of posters....but from what I am reading it appears as if he was telling Woodward that as more facts and evidence became public, woodwards credibility would take a hit? Thus he would regret "staking out this claim"?


I'm not really sure who released them to be honest - I just think it's interesting that everyone accepts what Woodward says is fact - and then runs with it

No good journalist would ever do that - that's for sure

And I agree - his credibility would be on the line (maybe - depending on a bunch of stuff we can't know)

Amusing that everyone assumes he's been threatened in some way

(That actually would be a more interesting story though...)

:-)



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:42 AM
link   
I fail to see how saying "you will regret doing this" could be perceived as a threat.

If I had a passenger in my vehicle and they were contemplating jumping out the door at 60 MPH, it would not be a threat for me to say "you will regret doing this".

If I knew someone who was about to drink battery acid on a drunken bet, it would not be a threat for me to say "you will regret doing this".

If I had a college friend who was planning on cheating on an exam, it would not be a threat for me to say "you will regret doing this".

If I had a friend who was a reporter and was about to publish inaccurate information, it would not be a threat for me to say "you will regret doing this".

Now, if I were to say "I will make you regret doing this"; well, that could potentially be perceived as a threat; but, those were not the words Gene Sperling used, now were they?



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by stirling
The email seems
inocuos enough,whats the big deal?


Funny that you would bring that up.
You do know....that Brennan has refused to answer a straight question as to
whether Americans will be drone targets on American soil, right?



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Woodward did the right thing by revealing the WH's strong arm tactics..........just in case there was a plan in the works to 'Breitbart' him for something he found out.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by LeatherNLace
I fail to see how saying "you will regret doing this" could be perceived as a threat.

If I had a passenger in my vehicle and they were contemplating jumping out the door at 60 MPH, it would not be a threat for me to say "you will regret doing this".

If I knew someone who was about to drink battery acid on a drunken bet, it would not be a threat for me to say "you will regret doing this"
In those cases your right, WHEN a Obama WHITE HOUSE tells a journalist their going to regret what was SAID is akin To telling ANYONE their going to regret what they said about you .. Your point is null and void



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 12:21 PM
link   
I am immediately suspicious of any reporter of any experience or nototeriety bitching about a governments decision to SCALE BACK our military presence and worldwide influence. I'm sure its all just part of the political circle jerk game they all play, but is it such a horrible idea that we tone down our threats of violence and death to middle east? I'm no Obama fan, but less blood spilled just sounds right to me.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Urantia1111
 


Well, I guess then you would be up in arms about the new drone base that Obama
just sent 100 troops to set up in Niger then? Predator drones are about 4mil each,
we are talking billions of dollars, in another quausi occupation to hunt al Queda.

edit on 28-2-2013 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


Threatening journalists? Didn't that kind of attack on the first amendment die with Lincoln???




top topics



 
88
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join