The White House Condemned the Release of the Lockerbie bomber.

[Sallow]

Why are you reviving a dead controversy sallow? What positive for your position can come from reviving a dead issue?
Shouldn't you be posting some positive achievement? Negativity won't help you cause unless ruffling up the extremes is your goal.

Quite possibly because I am pissed about it.

Gotcha. Well good luck. My rant yesterday didn't go over so well.

 

[Sallow]

While I am unconvinced that Obama 'pressurized' the Scots into releasing the Lockerbie bomber, I would put money on one thing... if this was Bush, instead of Obama, the left would be screaming like banshees about it. They'd be ready to hang him for it - despite the lack of solid evidence. Fucking hypocrites.

No darlin', they wouldn't. Gaddafi bankrolled and greenlighted Lockerbie. Bush brokered a deal with Gaddafi that allowed him back into the good graces of the world and got American oil companies back into Libya. And the "evidence" is rock solid.

No one was calling for his lynching.

I find your ability to buy whatever the Snake Oil Salesmen sell you to be remarkably naive.... ok, that's a lie... I actually find it mindnumbingly stupid but I'm trying to be polite.

Politicians say one thing in public, and something entirely different in private. Happens all the time... with every administration. Obama vilifies the rich... in public. And, for decades, this ploy has kept Americans focusing their ire at the wrong people. That people still fall for it is impressive. Idiots.

Okay.

Go on.

What part of that post is a lie?

 

[PredFan]

Umm, who said that Obama approved of his release?

People right here on this board.

It was one of the more vile lies told about our Commander in chief..in a long string of vile lies.

It is a lie, IF it was actually said. Can you give an example?

 

[PredFan]

I KNOW I did. Obama absolutely approved of the Lockerbie bomber release. So let's clear this up right away. I have been VERY VOCAL in exposing obama's role in pressuring Scotland.

Barack Obama must also answer questions over the Lockerbie bomber's release – Telegraph Blogs

The Lockerbie scandal has just become even murkier. According to a Sunday Times report yesterday “the US government secretly advised Scottish ministers that it would be “far preferable” to free the Lockerbie bomber than jail him in Libya.”

| The Australian

Correspondence obtained by The Sunday Times reveals the Obama administration considered compassionate release more palatable than locking up Abdel Baset al-Megrahi in a Libyan prison.

The intervention, which has angered US relatives of those who died in the attack, was made by Richard LeBaron, deputy head of the US embassy in London, a week before Megrahi was freed in August last year on grounds that he had terminal cancer

IMO, that isn't the same thing. Saying that freeing him is preferable to giving him to the Lybians is different. Hey, I'm no fan of Obama the Idiot but context is important and there's enough to criticise that moron on so that we don't have to make stuff up.

 

[PredFan]

I KNOW I did. Obama absolutely approved of the Lockerbie bomber release. So let's clear this up right away. I have been VERY VOCAL in exposing obama's role in pressuring Scotland.

Barack Obama must also answer questions over the Lockerbie bomber's release – Telegraph Blogs

The Lockerbie scandal has just become even murkier. According to a Sunday Times report yesterday “the US government secretly advised Scottish ministers that it would be “far preferable” to free the Lockerbie bomber than jail him in Libya.”

| The Australian

Correspondence obtained by The Sunday Times reveals the Obama administration considered compassionate release more palatable than locking up Abdel Baset al-Megrahi in a Libyan prison.

The intervention, which has angered US relatives of those who died in the attack, was made by Richard LeBaron, deputy head of the US embassy in London, a week before Megrahi was freed in August last year on grounds that he had terminal cancer

^Proof that people will believe anything if it confirms their bias.

Did you bother to dive into that pool any deeper?

Like clockwork. Someone showed up to confirm exactly what I posted.

One guy pal ONE. You failed to mention that in your OP.

 

[Sallow]

People right here on this board.

It was one of the more vile lies told about our Commander in chief..in a long string of vile lies.

It is a lie, IF it was actually said. Can you give an example?

Check the thread.

 

[Sallow]

^Proof that people will believe anything if it confirms their bias.

Did you bother to dive into that pool any deeper?

Like clockwork. Someone showed up to confirm exactly what I posted.

One guy pal ONE. You failed to mention that in your OP.

There are 2 examples listed in the thread. I ain't going to hunt for more.

And the one of the posters tagged 2 articles.

 

[PredFan]

No it isn't.

The Whitehouse is quite clear what they want done to terrorists.

Yes they are. Civilian trials.

Really?

Sincerely,
Osama bin Laden,
Anwar al-Awlaki
Abu Hafs al-Shahri
Atiyah ‘Abd al-Rahman
Ilyas Kashmiri
Ammar al-Wa’ili,
Abu Ali al-Harithi
Ali Saleh Farhan
Harun Fazu
Baitullah Mahsud
Noordin Muhammad Top
Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan
Saleh al-Somali
Abdallah Sa’id
Muhammad Haqqani
Lashkar-e Jhangvi leader Qari Zafar
Hussein al-Yemeni
Jemayah Islamiya
Abu Ayyub al-Masri
Abu Omar al-Baghdadi
Sheik Saeed al-Masri
Hamza al-Jawfi
<all killed>

Barack Hussein Obama, killing his way to victory in 2012!

 

[PredFan]

21 posts in..and nuttin'.

Exactly, this is a failed thread.

 

[PredFan]

Umm, who said that Obama approved of his release? No conservative I know said that. I remember EVERYONE condemning that stupid action.

Strawman much?

Read the board much?!?! There have been posts to that effect recently, all part of the concerted effort to not give Obama an ounce of credit over Libya.

One guy.

One guy =/= Conservatives

 

[konradv]

Umm, who said that Obama approved of his release? No conservative I know said that. I remember EVERYONE condemning that stupid action.

Strawman much?

Read the board much?!?! There have been posts to that effect recently, all part of the concerted effort to not give Obama an ounce of credit over Libya.

One guy.

One guy =/= Conservatives

What are you complaining about? One example is all we needed to disprove your post. The problem isn't us, but your use of absolutes. Usually not a good thing, unless you like having your ass handed to you!!!

From your post:
Umm, who said that Obama approved of his release? No conservative I know said that. I remember EVERYONE condemning that stupid action.

 

[Sallow]

21 posts in..and nuttin'.

Exactly, this is a failed thread.

Failed at what?

What failed was you guys in any of those threads to call that post an outright falsehood. You don't even do it here..really.

Tells ya something.

 

[Sallow]

Umm, who said that Obama approved of his release? No conservative I know said that. I remember EVERYONE condemning that stupid action.

Strawman much?

Read the board much?!?! There have been posts to that effect recently, all part of the concerted effort to not give Obama an ounce of credit over Libya.

One guy.

One guy =/= Conservatives

In this thread there are 2 posts that are highlighted. Additionally there are 2 articles that are sourced.

Tells ya something.

 

[PredFan]

Why are you reviving a dead controversy sallow? What positive for your position can come from reviving a dead issue?
Shouldn't you be posting some positive achievement? Negativity won't help your cause unless ruffling up the extremes is your goal.

Negating an outright LIE is a positive thing to do, Gramps.

Its a positive thing to do whether the lie is about Obama or Bush II or whoever.

It isn't positive when you use the opinion of ONE conservative as a paintbrush to brush all conservatives with.

 

[Sallow]

Why are you reviving a dead controversy sallow? What positive for your position can come from reviving a dead issue?
Shouldn't you be posting some positive achievement? Negativity won't help your cause unless ruffling up the extremes is your goal.

Negating an outright LIE is a positive thing to do, Gramps.

Its a positive thing to do whether the lie is about Obama or Bush II or whoever.

It isn't positive when you use the opinion of ONE conservative as a paintbrush to brush all conservatives with.

There are TWO in this thread. As well as articles. Your focus seems to be protecting conservatives and not correcting the falsehood.

 

[PredFan]

Why are you reviving a dead controversy sallow? What positive for your position can come from reviving a dead issue?
Shouldn't you be posting some positive achievement? Negativity won't help your cause unless ruffling up the extremes is your goal.

Negating an outright LIE is a positive thing to do, Gramps.

Its a positive thing to do whether the lie is about Obama or Bush II or whoever.

I see this as an issue that without a smoking gun can't be proven or disproven. Unless I see documented evidence ill have to give the benefit of the doubt to Obama. Just as I would to bush.

No conservative I know and no conservative I've heard has ever stated anything but the truth that this administration was just as against the release of the terrorist as we conservatives were, not Rush, Hannity, Boortz, or Levin.

 

[PredFan]

Like clockwork. Someone showed up to confirm exactly what I posted.

One guy pal ONE. You failed to mention that in your OP.

There are 2 examples listed in the thread. I ain't going to hunt for more.

And the one of the posters tagged 2 articles.

Hello? McFly?

If there are two, it isn't all concervatives and the fact that you didn't make that clear in your OP means that YOU are the liar here.

 

[Meister]

I KNOW I did. Obama absolutely approved of the Lockerbie bomber release. So let's clear this up right away. I have been VERY VOCAL in exposing obama's role in pressuring Scotland.

Barack Obama must also answer questions over the Lockerbie bomber's release – Telegraph Blogs

The Lockerbie scandal has just become even murkier. According to a Sunday Times report yesterday “the US government secretly advised Scottish ministers that it would be “far preferable” to free the Lockerbie bomber than jail him in Libya.”

| The Australian

Correspondence obtained by The Sunday Times reveals the Obama administration considered compassionate release more palatable than locking up Abdel Baset al-Megrahi in a Libyan prison.

The intervention, which has angered US relatives of those who died in the attack, was made by Richard LeBaron, deputy head of the US embassy in London, a week before Megrahi was freed in August last year on grounds that he had terminal cancer

^Proof that people will believe anything if it confirms their bias.

Did you bother to dive into that pool any deeper?

The irony is thick

 

[Sallow]

Negating an outright LIE is a positive thing to do, Gramps.

Its a positive thing to do whether the lie is about Obama or Bush II or whoever.

I see this as an issue that without a smoking gun can't be proven or disproven. Unless I see documented evidence ill have to give the benefit of the doubt to Obama. Just as I would to bush.

No conservative I know and no conservative I've heard has ever stated anything but the truth that this administration was just as against the release of the terrorist as we conservatives were, not Rush, Hannity, Boortz, or Levin.

Oh gosh.

Obama Lied on Lockerbie Bomber - The Rush Limbaugh Show

RUSH: Well, that's just not true because the White House privately backed the release of the Lockerbie bomber. That's right. This is from The Australian, published today: "The US government secretly advised Scottish ministers it would be 'far preferable' to free the Lockerbie bomber than jail him in Libya. Correspondence obtained by The Sunday Times reveals the Obama administration considered compassionate release more palatable than locking up Abdel Baset al-Megrahi in a Libyan prison. The intervention, which has angered US relatives of those who died in the attack, was made by Richard LeBaron, deputy head of the US embassy in London, a week before Megrahi was freed in August last year on grounds that he had terminal cancer," from which he's apparently recovered. "The document, acquired by a well-placed US source, threatens to undermine US President Barack Obama's claim last week that all Americans were 'surprised, disappointed and angry' to learn of Megrahi's release. Scottish ministers viewed the level of US resistance to compassionate release as 'half-hearted' and a sign it would be accepted."

Right-wing media falsely claim White House "supported" release of Lockerbie bomber | Media Matters for America

 

[Sallow]

One guy pal ONE. You failed to mention that in your OP.

There are 2 examples listed in the thread. I ain't going to hunt for more.

And the one of the posters tagged 2 articles.

Hello? McFly?

If there are two, it isn't all concervatives and the fact that you didn't make that clear in your OP means that YOU are the liar here.

Fuck you.