Creepy

Sabrina said:
Wait, did he just say Senator Edwards was an ACTIVE CIA agent at the time of 9/11?
Click to expand...

Similar to Dianne Feinstein. CIA's is responsible for reporting too curtain members of congress. Once again reports to congress are only made when its required for maintaining national security. Reports to congress are withheld, in the same breath, for maintaining nation security.
 
Last edited:
Considering how leaky some congressional offices are, I don't blame them sometimes for not letter certain members of congress know details of operations.

So OldSchool: His life as a trial lawyer was just a sham since he was a CIA agent working on "Operation Poopypants Surprise" set for action on 9/11/01?
 
SpaceMonkeyZero said:
I think he just said John Edwards was a CIA spook?

Maybe he has him mixed up with that John Edward guy who speaks to "dead" people.
Click to expand...

I find John Edwards too be very respectable. I sincerely doubt he's corrupt in anyway and have never made such a suggestion. I hope he's Hillary Clinton's running mate in 2008.
 
SpaceMonkeyZero said:
Considering how leaky some congressional offices are, I don't blame them sometimes for not letter certain members of congress know details of operations.

So OldSchool: His life as a trial lawyer was just a sham since he was a CIA agent working on "Operation Poopypants Surprise" set for action on 9/11/01?
Click to expand...

This is an area which gets quite sticky. Any government run institution including intelligence may have members impeached. The Charter which governs the CIA has stretched an institution beyond Constitutionality.
 
OldSchool said:
Similar to Dianne Feinstein. CIA's is responsible for reporting too curtain members of congress. Once again reports to congress are only made when its required for maintaining national security. Reports to congress are withheld, in the same breath, for maintaining nation security.
Click to expand...

You could have just said, "No, sorry, I was wrong, I made a mistake" but no, you are actually trying to say John Edwards is a member of the CIA? It's alright, you got mixed up, happens to all of us, but don't try to cover it up by digging deeper.

Ok, moving on, if you like the guy, and would vote for him and say he's not in on any conspiracy, I still don't understand how this is creepy.
 
OldSchool said:
As I'm extremely familiar with how the CIA functions they're by far the most powerful and secretive organization in the world. Any field agent, up to and including the highest ranking member of the CIA, can take any action or break any law and doesn't have to report too his superior, unless he deems it vital to national security.
Click to expand...
And how did you come by this intimate knowledge of the CIA? Is your research of the CIA based on "24" and the Bourne movies perchance?

They can break any law, eh? Any evidence of this?

Lurker
 
Lurker said:
And how did you come by this intimate knowledge of the CIA? Is your research of the CIA based on "24" and the Bourne movies perchance?

They can break any law, eh? Any evidence of this?

Lurker
Click to expand...

I'd suggest you go to a government documents section of a library, and read everything declassified during the Reagan administration.
 
Viper Daimao said:
You could have just said, "No, sorry, I was wrong, I made a mistake" but no, you are actually trying to say John Edwards is a member of the CIA? It's alright, you got mixed up, happens to all of us, but don't try to cover it up by digging deeper.

Ok, moving on, if you like the guy, and would vote for him and say he's not in on any conspiracy, I still don't understand how this is creepy.
Click to expand...

Actually if you read the CIA's charter members of congress which receive reports from the CIA are considered members of the CIA. This is important because otherwise they could simply leak information. Since they're under the same rules of conduct of any CIA member security of the institution is kept.
 
OldSchool said:
Beechnut after this playground response I'd imagine my pet fish knew about as much as you did. Just kick back enjoy the ride and the Federal Paycheck you receive every month. Wouldn't want to actually stand up against the Nazi tactics of our current military, you might end up like Tillman.
Click to expand...
You are reprehensible.

Also, not in any way, shape, or form a writer.
 
Regnad Kcin said:
You are reprehensible.

Also, not in any way, shape, or form a writer.
Click to expand...


Isn't any part of the statement which is false. Beyond the JREF forum the post would be considered humorous truth.

Aside from the new membership agreement, your opinion of my above average writing skills doesn't really make much difference. I have a feeling my College Professors had slightly more insight into the aspects of good writing ability.
 
OldSchool said:
I find John Edwards too be very respectable. I sincerely doubt he's corrupt in anyway and have never made such a suggestion. I hope he's Hillary Clinton's running mate in 2008.
Click to expand...

A guy who claims to be a professional writer can write a sentence like this?
"Too" and "He's Corrupt in anyway"?
I am probably way off base,but could it be possible that Old School is lying about that like he is everything else?
 
dudalb said:
A guy who claims to be a professional writer can write a sentence like this?
"Too" and "He's Corrupt in anyway"?
I am probably way off base,but could it be possible that Old School is lying about that like he is everything else?
Click to expand...
A Twoofer? Telling fibs?
What is the world coming to(o)?
 
I find it remarkable that the twoofers think themselves such good analysts of intelligence, but would not understand why a senator, informed of what intelligence services had determined, would not divulge to the world what the intelligence services knew and what they intended to do with that intelligence.

Twoofers do not understand intelligence.

(Whichever definition of that word you wish to apply.)
 
OldSchool said:
Isn't any part of the statement which is false. Beyond the JREF forum the post would be considered humorous truth.
Click to expand...

I doubt there's many that would find a Pat Tillman's death reference humorous, and you're way too liberal with the definition of the word "truth".

Only thing I'm not sure of is whether or not you know what the word "false" means.
 
Can we agree that there is as much evidence proving that OldSchool has above average writing skills as there is proving that 9-11 is an inside job?
 
OldSchool said:
Isn't any part of the statement which is false. Beyond the JREF forum the post would be considered humorous truth.

Aside from the new membership agreement, your opinion of my above average writing skills doesn't really make much difference. I have a feeling my College Professors had slightly more insight into the aspects of good writing ability.
Click to expand...


As an ex service man myself I find your remarks offensive. If it is considered humorous of other forums you infest feel free to clear off and go there and indulge in other forms of "humorous truth".
 
OldSchool said:
Aside from the new membership agreement, your opinion of my above average writing skills doesn't really make much difference. I have a feeling my College Professors had slightly more insight into the aspects of good writing ability.
Click to expand...

I find it curious that claim to have a college education. You certainly write as if you don't have one. Can you explain this discrepancy?

You studied English, yes?

Do you consider that your purported educational qualifications give you some authority? Is that why you keep mentioning them?

If they aren't relevant, perhaps we should stop talking about them and concentrate on the arguments. No attempts to appeal to authority...

If you insist, though, can you demonstrate that you have a college education in English? I think you don't. As the holder of a BA in English and Philosophy I am reasonably well qualified to judge this.

I don't think anybody's education is necessarily relevant, independent of the validity of the arguments they make. Nevertheless, this is a claim you are making; how, then, can we test it?

If you are being dishonest it seems curious that you are also seeking the truth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom