WOW!
Ken: WOW is right,keep up the good work and good luck with your business in 2012/2013, E
Now all we need is a story on how Cheney leaked (faulty) intel to the NY Times about supposed chemical weapons in Iraq and then had the balls to site the story during a Face the Nation interview as 'proof' and to garner support for an invasion.
My point? Administrations have been "leaking" to the press for time immemorial...not that it shouldn't be discouraged.
Ken, thanks for sharing. The current administration has set back the intelligence community 10 years.
My dear friend Karl; The post is about today, not 20 years ago. We knew Iraq had these weapons because we gave it to them. No Americans were in danger with what Cheney said. If what Cheney did was wrong, it doesn't make it OK for anyone to do it now. Either you did not view the video completely or you just "forgot" about history.
I'm still puzzled about why we need any story about Cheney or anyone else from 20 or 30 years ago. American lives are at stake here. We should not be broadcasting our secrets so as to make us more vulnerable.
If anything in the video is factually incorrect please tell us about it. Let's keep it on topic. Thanks for the comment.
Mike, nice to see you, thanks for stopping by.
Ed & Tracy; nice to meet you folks.
Hi, Ken ~ As Ben Smith said on the video, in the 'trenches' they're all Americans and party affiliations don't matter, as it should be. They just want to complete the mission and come out alive. Obama disregards America's security and the service members' safety for his own political gain.
Kenneth, nice work, in view of Karl's comment, has he produced any evidence or is it just another unnamed source?
Now back to topic. Could it be that one of the reasons why we will not go into Syria is that the chemical weapons we gave to Saddam were removed and placed in Syria? And with that thought, like Harry Reid says, it is up to the Obama administration to prove it false.
I think Karl is on-topic as the video has two major points:
1. leaking of intelligence in general
2. leaking intelligence for political gain or agenda
Karl emphasized point 2. I am glad you admited that we gave Saddam chemical weapons he used against the Kurds and the Iranians.
My take is that I want to know what our country is doing in our name so when the towers get hit by airplanes, I am not dumbfounded and think we were attacked because of our freedom. To me, I just wasted 22 minutes of my life watching a video that said that our president is the worst president because he was leaking info for political gain AND that our foreign policy should be hidden from the American people.Both accusations I disagree with!
Instead of being upset that Obama leaked that he has a kill list for drone strikes, these guys should be upset that we have a kill list that includes American citizens and we are doing drone strikes in other countries!
What? No one got killed? The leaks to Judith Miller, et al were meant to influence the US populace (and government) into invading Iraq....and btw it happened less than 10 years ago (and we just got out), not 20 or 30.
But the Ben Smith stuff is pretty good.....
Karl; please stay on topic. You are talking about something else. I'm just a simple man, and you lost me there, Your comment is not a comment on the video. Did you watch the video?
Help us out, is there anything incorrect in the video? That's all I'm asking. I would like to know. Thank you.
P.S. We are not out of Iraq.
The article that Karl provided rebuke's the video's claim that Obama took credit for the Bin Laden assault.
You also state that Karl is offtopic. Did you watch the video? Do you think that Obama purposely leaks intel for political advantage? If so, do you think that Obama is the first president to do so? And more importantly, do you think it is OK for the government to engage in foreign policy without the knowledge of the American people?
Dale - Comment 6 - "...in view of Karl's comment, has he produced any evidence or is it just another unnamed source? "
John Stewart covered Karl's comment #2. He actually provided both the report and the interview. Google it.
Satar; You ask an excellent question with regarding the American peoples engaging in foreign policy. Too many folks don't know who their congressman is. Do you think they are interested in foreign affairs? I wonder how many can name just 4 Justices of the Supreme Court.
A group of retired special operations and CIA officers who claim President Barack Obama revealed secret missions and turned the killing of Osama bin Laden into a campaign centerpiece are coming under criticism from some of their own.
Some special operations officers say the activist veterans are breaking a sacred military creed: respect for the commander in chief.
"This is an unprofessional, shameful action on the part of the operators that appear in the video, period," U.S. Army Special Forces Maj. Fernando Lujan wrote on his Facebook page, to a chorus of approval from colleagues.
A Green Beret who returned last year from Afghanistan, Lujan says that attaching the title of special operator with any political campaign is "in violation of everything we've been taught, and the opposite of what we should be doing, which is being quiet professionals."
Nothing can diminish the truth. So, do we omit the truth because it's dis-respectful, or unprofessional, or because it hurts the other party?
My concern is only about this Country, not a political party or person. Period.
Are you saying that this video is nothing but "the truth?" If you are, I've got a bridge.....
Comments (15)Subscribe to CommentsComment