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.
originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: ~Lucidity
Well, then there is this - link
So, how is mentioning something I can see online a revealing of classified data?
originally posted by: dragonridr
originally posted by: smurfy
For goodness sake, people really need to get the hang of things. Trump doesn't need an intel briefing, he's right there in it, and gets paid for it.
For starters he's been courting Russia for decades....business is business isn't it? or perhaps more, so who's been hacking the Clinton e-mails then, that most here seem to be comfortable with..for instance?
Yes the OP is dicky, almost a blind, maybe that's because Washington Republicans have an insider who also deals with Ukraine, and also that the Republican platform no longer has reference to arming Ukraine against pro-russian rebels, while there is dissent amongst some Republicans on that decision, regardless as to how much they actually know about the situation in the Ukraine, another story in itself.
Whatever, Donald is there, and in as many beds he as he can make.
You can burn the midnight oil here, read it good, because in my humble opinion Trump is ultimately just making fools of those who support him, because he is all about himself..literally a carpetbagger, messing with the wrong people, and all you need to do, is find out who the wrong people are...that'll take a while.
www.theguardian.com...
Hilary is no great shakes, and personally I would not be enamoured by her, Trump however is something else.
Is that really all you got?? He wanted to build hotels in Moscow. Oh and he was supposed to have a meeting with Putin but he cancelled. Wow that's a solid link do you realize Hillary has taken money from Russians close to putin. And even campaign funds but Trump is the one with the ties yea right.
originally posted by: Flavian
I don't have a horse in this race and in many ways don't really care (doesn't affect me either way) but i would say that it shows just how messed up and polarised America is these days when Hillary gets pilloried for this but it seems ok for Trump?
That is complete hypocrisy. Ok, Hillary was much larger scale but that doesn't change anything. It shouldn't be one rule for one, a different rule for another. Either it is ok or it isn't - no in betweens. If it isn't ok, then charge them both, even just for fines. It publicly shames and (hopefully) then forces a more constructive campaign rather than endless mud slinging.
originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: ~Lucidity
I thought King Fahd Air Base, Eskan village Air Base and King Abdul Aziz Air Base were all known US military installations in Saudi?
Maybe Zap can confirm their decommissioning?
militarybases.com...
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Flavian
I don't have a horse in this race and in many ways don't really care (doesn't affect me either way) but i would say that it shows just how messed up and polarised America is these days when Hillary gets pilloried for this but it seems ok for Trump?
That is complete hypocrisy. Ok, Hillary was much larger scale but that doesn't change anything. It shouldn't be one rule for one, a different rule for another. Either it is ok or it isn't - no in betweens. If it isn't ok, then charge them both, even just for fines. It publicly shames and (hopefully) then forces a more constructive campaign rather than endless mud slinging.
You didn't even read through the thread did you? That's how propaganda works. Never mind that there is no classified information discussed by Trump at all. Just read the headline and decide Clinton and Trump did the same thing... pretty pathetic. How about 'Deny Ignorance'? I guess that might be too hard for you
originally posted by: Flavian
a reply to: UKTruth
Actually yes i did read the thread (yesterday) and also the acknowledgement from the OP that they weren't sure how accurate it was.
That hasn't stopped anyone else posting or discussing though has it? Including yourself.........
originally posted by: SudoNim
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Flavian
I don't have a horse in this race and in many ways don't really care (doesn't affect me either way) but i would say that it shows just how messed up and polarised America is these days when Hillary gets pilloried for this but it seems ok for Trump?
That is complete hypocrisy. Ok, Hillary was much larger scale but that doesn't change anything. It shouldn't be one rule for one, a different rule for another. Either it is ok or it isn't - no in betweens. If it isn't ok, then charge them both, even just for fines. It publicly shames and (hopefully) then forces a more constructive campaign rather than endless mud slinging.
You didn't even read through the thread did you? That's how propaganda works. Never mind that there is no classified information discussed by Trump at all. Just read the headline and decide Clinton and Trump did the same thing... pretty pathetic. How about 'Deny Ignorance'? I guess that might be too hard for you
The fact that it turned out to be incorrect doesn't excuse the hypocrisy from Trump supporters who commented while unaware of such.
You were all ready to change your stance on the subject and do a complete flip-flop. That's about as feeble as the sheep go.
That the thread title turned out to be incorrect doesn't mean you didn't show your true colours.
A Trump supporter using the phrase "Deny Ignorance" is one of the most laughable things I've seen on ATS.
originally posted by: Flavian
a reply to: UKTruth
Actually yes i did read the thread (yesterday) and also the acknowledgement from the OP that they weren't sure how accurate it was.
That hasn't stopped anyone else posting or discussing though has it? Including yourself.........
originally posted by: CynConcepts
The revelation of the drone base came shortly after the leaking of a US justice department memo detailing the Obama administration's case for killing any American abroad who is accused of being a "senior, operational leader" of al-Qaeda or its allies.
Lethal force is lawful if they are deemed to pose an "imminent threat" and their capture is not feasible, the memo says.
The threat does not have to be based on intelligence about a specific attack, since such actions are being "continually" planned by al-Qaeda, it adds.
NBC News said it was given to members of the US Senate intelligence and judiciary committees as a summary of a classified memo on the targeted killings of US citizens prepared by the justice department.
The latter memo was written before the drone strike that killed Awlaki.
Under President Obama, the US has expanded its use of drones to kill hundreds of al-Qaeda suspects in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Yemen. It says it is acting in self-defence in accordance with international law.
2013 BBC News article
Seems to me that it was Obama's administration that dropped the ball back according to this 2013 article and leaked classified information. Hmmm.