• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Levin: Memos don't show what Cheney says they do

So let me ask the conservatives something.

When people accused Bush and Cheney of Lying and to release classified documents that was wrong to conservatives because it could jeopardize national security.

But now that a Dem president is in charge they think those same classified memos should be released even though it could jeopardize national security?

At least keep consistent.

I think they release too much and have begged and pleaded that they stop doing that since forever.
 
So let me ask the conservatives something.

When people accused Bush and Cheney of Lying and to release classified documents that was wrong to conservatives because it could jeopardize national security.

But now that a Dem president is in charge they think those same classified memos should be released even though it could jeopardize national security?

At least keep consistent.

The premise of this argument suggests they have gained valuable information and are witholding it. If this were true, it de facto backs Cheney's claim that we got useful info out of them.

If we got dicksquat out of them, it should be a simple matter of releasing any memo Cheney has requested and laughing at his claims. We get silence instead.

In essence, without releasing of the material, all arguments are in the favor of Cheney's position.
 
I think they release too much and have begged and pleaded that they stop doing that since forever.

I totally agree with this! If our elected officials would do the jobs they were elected and appointed to do we civilians wouldn't need to know much of this stuff.

Remember when the media released the fact that the military was tracking OBL via his satellite phone? He then stopped using the phone. If that info had been kept secret maybe we would have fried his ass.

Arrgggghhhhh!!!!!
 
You can leave the irrelevant hyper partisan nonsense at the door. Thanks.

What? Lacking in the humor dept. are we?

And who might you be?
A Mod? No, just another pissed off Lib... LOL.

As you were.

.
 
Levin has seen Cheney's two documents, and says Cheney is lying. No surprise and.....case closed.

Yea case close wonder why the CIA doesn't want any of the Document released hmmm lets think about it folks.

Oh and Mr. Levin is calling Mr. Cheney a lyer thats like the Kettle calling itself Black please.
 
The premise of this argument suggests they have gained valuable information and are witholding it. If this were true, it de facto backs Cheney's claim that we got useful info out of them.

Sorry but no that does not suggest that. The means by which we tried to get something could be classified as well. Not just the information.
 
Levin has seen Cheney's two documents, and says Cheney is lying. No surprise and.....case closed.
So no one will ever be able to prove who is lying, including whether Levin is.
 
So, for those people in the rest of the world, and some here in the US, when they think of the US and torture, they think of the images from Abu Ghraib. It's not fair, it's not right, but some people do think of us kinda like you think of Mr Levin.

By the way, I know Carl Levin, and I would not describe him as either "moron" or "liar".

If he's not a moron or a liar why would he either accidentally, or purposefully conflate the illegal unsanctioned actions at Abu Ghraib with the sanctioned coercive interrogations which took place at Gitmo?
 
If he's not a moron or a liar why would he either accidentally, or purposefully conflate the illegal unsanctioned actions at Abu Ghraib with the sanctioned coercive interrogations which took place at Gitmo?

He did not do that though. He said "if they are once more seen as representative of America", that is, that this is how people came to view the US under Bush.
 
He did not do that though. He said "if they are once more seen as representative of America", that is, that this is how people came to view the US under Bush.

No he clearly conflated the two. Abu Ghraib has no place whatsoever in the current debate, it's a strawman.
 
Back
Top Bottom