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.
t's easy to say that Cheney is not significant, that he's just an embittered private citizen with an approval rating well below freezing. But Cheney is not a radio talk-show host or a blowhard congressman who can spout any nonsense without consequence. He served at the top of the American government for eight years and designed the war on terror he now champions. His words are carried all around the world. And those words are now unquestionably harming the national security of the United States. There's nothing wrong with Cheney “politicizing” terrorism. In a democracy, everything should be the subject of public debate. He is entitled to criticize Obama's decision to prosecute CIA interrogators for torture or to put Khalid Sheikh Mohammed on trial in New York City.
It's the dishonest nature of Cheney's harsh attacks on Obama that threaten our safety. Can anyone think of another former president or vice president accusing a sitting president of not defending the country? It's important to distinguish between in-bounds political rhetoric and out-of-bounds lying. Cheney unambiguously lied by saying Obama is "trying to pretend we are not at war," when in fact the president said explicitly in his Inaugural Address and on at least a dozen subsequent occasions that we are at war. Obama's only amendment to the war language has been to drop the "on terror" part. The president, who has sharply stepped up Predator drone attacks on jihadists from the Bush-Cheney years, knows you can't fight a war against a tactic.
Originally posted by Quickfix
reply to post by Signals
Charge Cheny with Treason. I believe it may have been Thomas Jefferson whom shot a man on the white house lawn for treason.
Treason punishable by death? Yay? or Nay?
"I think he had his eight years, and he's caused a lot of trouble for our country and perpetuated a war in Iraq unnecessary and wrong-headed," said Paul. "I would say it would be best he not be so critical right now." Paul was a constant critic of the Iraq war during his unsuccessful presidential run. While he is currently not seeking a higher office, his son, Rand, is seeking the Republican nomination for Senate in Kentucky. Paul's comments come several days after Cheney released a tough-worded statement criticizing the president's response to the attempted terrorist attack on Christmas Day. "He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won't be at war," Cheney said in the statement. "He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of 9/11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won't be at war. He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core al Qaeda trained terrorists still there, we won't be at war."' White House Communications Director Dan Pffeifer later responded the president "is not interested in bellicose rhetoric, he is focused on action."
Originally posted by hangedman13
reply to post by Signals
Well if the current administration would stop blaming the last one maybe it would be practical. However Team O needs to have someone laying down a reality check! Since your so upset that Cheney is criticizing the current administration I gotta ask, when was the last time you heard a sitting potus blaming the last potus for events that happened on their watch?
Originally posted by Quickfix
If you had a brain you would realize Cheny is just as bad as Bush Jr. and is guilty of crimes against humanity....like genocide.
Originally posted by hangedman13
reply to post by Signals
I gotta ask, when was the last time you heard a sitting potus blaming the last potus for events that happened on their watch?