A Simple Question for Barack, Earned

[jreeves]

No, actually it wouldn't. They also didn't say secret program, they said secretve. As in, doesn't provide information willingly.

It wouldn't be public knowledge if it wasn't providing information willingly? So which is it?

 

[nibor]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MR8p0bro9RM&feature=user

See how one's own words mean more than hyping and rhetoric?

Yes I see it, but what's exactly your point?

 

[nibor]

Dude their claiming they have obtained secret documents which is illegal, but you rely on them as a source? Don't you understand someone who claims to have broken the law may not be reliable?

Whom would you suggest are "the reliable", seriuosly?

 

[jreeves]

Whom would you suggest are "the reliable", seriuosly?

Nobody is completely reliable, but one should use their critical thinking skills before they follow the herd of sheep.

 

[jreeves]

Yes I see it, but what's exactly your point?

You should rely on what is said, rather than some trumped up story from a secretive program.

 

[Larkinn]

It wouldn't be public knowledge if it wasn't providing information willingly? So which is it?

Yes, actually it could be. They aren't mutually exclusive. Hence a little act called "the freedom of information act", where people can sue the government to release information they want kept secret, but isn't classified.

 

[jreeves]

Yes, actually it could be. They aren't mutually exclusive. Hence a little act called "the freedom of information act", where people can sue the government to release information they want kept secret, but isn't classified.

So that's how this information was obtained proof please? Or are you just speaking out of your ass again?

 

[Larkinn]

So that's how this information was obtained proof please? Or are you just speaking out of your ass again?

Jackass. I have no idea how it was obtained. Point being neither do you. You made a claim about how it was obtained. I've demonstrated that you just made some shit up about how it was illegal.

 

[jreeves]

No, actually it wouldn't. They also didn't say secret program, they said secretve. As in, doesn't provide information willingly.

The secretive program, which spans at least twenty-seven countries, has been an incredible jackpot for one heavily Republican-connected firm in particular: Blackwater USA. Government records recently obtained by The Nation reveal that the Bush Administration has paid Blackwater more than $320 million since June 2004 to provide "diplomatic security" services globally.

I drew my own opinion based on the facts in the article, show me how I am flawed in assuming this, or are you going to keep talking from your ass.

 

[Larkinn]

The secretive program, which spans at least twenty-seven countries, has been an incredible jackpot for one heavily Republican-connected firm in particular: Blackwater USA. Government records recently obtained by The Nation reveal that the Bush Administration has paid Blackwater more than $320 million since June 2004 to provide "diplomatic security" services globally.

I drew my own opinion based on the facts in the article, show me how I am flawed in assuming this, or are you going to keep talking from your ass.

I've already shown how your flawed in assuming that.

Secretive can mean that its kept secret by the government not making the information available, NOT by them making it classified. If they don't make it available, its not illegal to access it, especially not via a FOIA request.

 

[jreeves]

I've already shown how your flawed in assuming that.

Secretive can mean that its kept secret by the government not making the information available, NOT by them making it classified. If they don't make it available, its not illegal to access it, especially not via a FOIA request.

If they were truly wanting it to be kept secret, they would classify it, dumbass. I am glad the likes of you don't control what gets classified and what doesn't. If so, all one would have to do, is do a FOIA request to find out all of our nation's secrets.

 

[Larkinn]

If they were truly wanting it to be kept secret, they would classify it, dumbass.

We aren't talking about what they "truly want", we are talking about a description from the Huffington Post of a program being "secretive". That you pulled from that the asinine conclusion that they were classified, and the Huffington Post was breaking the law by revealing that is absurd.

I am glad the likes of you don't control what gets classified and what doesn't. If so, all one would have to do, is do a FOIA request to find out all of our nation's secrets.

How you got from me explaning the difference between secret documents you can get with FOIA requests, and classified documents, to this, I have no idea. I guess, as usual, you assumed something and just made shit up.

 

[jreeves]

We aren't talking about what they "truly want", we are talking about a description from the Huffington Post of a program being "secretive". That you pulled from that the asinine conclusion that they were classified, and the Huffington Post was breaking the law by revealing that is absurd.



How you got from me explaning the difference between secret documents you can get with FOIA requests, and classified documents, to this, I have no idea. I guess, as usual, you assumed something and just made shit up.

Proof that it's absurd, or are you going to speak in circles? If an adminstration is trying to conceal something from the public it would be classified dumbass. So which is it, was the article making a false assumption or were they in fact disclosing secret documents?

 

[Larkinn]

Proof that it's absurd, or are you going to speak in circles? If an adminstration is trying to conceal something from the public it would be classified dumbass.

Either you are stupid, lying, or both.

Take the reports for abuse of detainees in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Gitmo. They aren't classified. But go and ask the government for them. They won't give them to you. In fact, the ACLU had to go to court to get them. Thats how much the administration wanted to conceal them from the public. But yet, they weren't classified.

So which is it, was the article making a false assumption or were they in fact disclosing secret documents?

It was YOU making false assumptions that something the government wants kept secret must be classified.

 

[Jon]

McCain wouldn't show up because he would have voted agains it.

Horrible argument. Obama did not vote for 39 measures during last year's Senate meetings. McCain and Clinton missed less than half that number.

This video would have been much better had it ended with, "If he won't listen to us, who WILL he listen to?" and then is followed by Wright's, "God damn America!"

 

[nibor]

Proof that it's absurd, or are you going to speak in circles? If an adminstration is trying to conceal something from the public it would be classified dumbass. So which is it, was the article making a false assumption or were they in fact disclosing secret documents?

It could possibly be that many in our gubment leak like colanders.............?

 

[jreeves]

It could possibly be that many in our gubment leak like colanders.............?

That the Huffington Post illegally reported or falsely misrepresented?

 

[jreeves]

That the Huffington Post illegally reported or falsely misrepresented?

Again what does this article have to do with....


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MR8p0bro9RM&feature=user[/ame]

or

]<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="http://blip.tv/scripts/flash/showplayer.swf?enablejs=true&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvetsforfreedomtv%2Eblip%2Etv%2Frss&file=http%3A%2F%2Fblip%2Etv%2Frss%2Fflash%2F935295%3Freferrer%3Dblip%2Etv%26source%3D1&showplayerpath=http%3A%2F%2Fblip%2Etv%2Fscripts%2Fflash%2Fshowplayer%2Eswf" width="400" height="255" allowfullscreen="true" id="showplayer"><param name="movie" value="http://blip.tv/scripts/flash/showplayer.swf?enablejs=true&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvetsforfreedomtv%2Eblip%2Etv%2Frss&file=http%3A%2F%2Fblip%2Etv%2Frss%2Fflash%2F935295%3Freferrer%3Dblip%2Etv%26source%3D1&showplayerpath=http%3A%2F%2Fblip%2Etv%2Fscripts%2Fflash%2Fshowplayer%2Eswf" /><param name="quality" value="best" /><embed src="http://blip.tv/scripts/flash/showplayer.swf?enablejs=true&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvetsforfreedomtv%2Eblip%2Etv%2Frss&file=http%3A%2F%2Fblip%2Etv%2Frss%2Fflash%2F935295%3Freferrer%3Dblip%2Etv%26source%3D1&showplayerpath=http%3A%2F%2Fblip%2Etv%2Fscripts%2Fflash%2Fshowplayer%2Eswf" quality="best" width="400" height="255" name="showplayer" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></object

 

[Nate Peele]

I think Obama should have to go to Iraq. If he wants to talk about the war, its only fair. My only worry would be if we could afford the manpower. I know when McCain was there in 2007 he was guarded by 100 American soldiers, with three Blackhawk helicopters, and two Apache gunships overhead. With our troops already stretched thin, it'd be nice if Obama would pony up his own security detail.

 

[nibor]

Nobody is completely reliable, but one should use their critical thinking skills before they follow the herd of sheep.

It was but an example...........................there's probably 36 flavors, but are they wrong>>>>>>>?