Comments on: Cheney: It doesn’t matter that we haven’t captured bin Laden.

By: youtube

youtube — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:34:16 +0000

he is a lying war ccetriminal.
He admits to waterbbedava mp3 indiroarding three individuals.you really are delusional if you think the Bush administration paid al qaeda to attack ussohbet on 9/11.

By: chucko33

chucko33 — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:24:36 +0000

Why would you attempt to catch the people you paid to carry out the attacks. Do you think we are stupid Mr.Vice Prez.

Noliesplease, you really are delusional if you think the Bush administration paid al qaeda to attack us on 9/11. You are apparently part of the “9/11 was an inside job crowd.” Pretty sad.

By: chucko33

chucko33 — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:20:46 +0000

CageyCretin, now YOU are lying (use your comprehension skills, the ones you were supposed to learn in 2nd grade). ThinkProgress made up a word Cheney never said (”inconsequential”). That was TP’s word, NOT his. TP interpreted, wrongly, that his comments “indicated” that Osama was “inconsequential.” Cheney actually said at the start of this clip that he “would very much like to capture Osama.” (Maybe you need to get your hearing checked?) And for the sake of accuracy and proper journalism, you and everyone else here should know that before going any further with your comments.

All Cheney was saying is that keeping this country safe from another al qaeda terrorist attack since 9/11 is bigger than catching any one of its members (like Osama and his deputies). He’s right (for once). Capturing Osama or Zawahiri would be great, but al qaeda could still have the ability to strike its enemies anywhere, anytime.

If you don’t think that a post-Osama bin Laden al qaeda attack on the U.S. is possible, you’re delusional. Al Qaeda will not go away anytime soon, no matter how many leaders get killed or captured. Hope you (and TP) get it now.

By: NOLIESPLEASE

NOLIESPLEASE — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:02:50 +0000

Why would you attempt to catch the people you paid to carry out the attacks. Do you think we are stupid Mr.Vice Prez.

By: CageyCretin

CageyCretin — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:36:29 +0000

Actually the headline is not a lie. Use your english skills, please. You know, the ones you learned in school (assuming you were paying attention). To denote a person, thing, or event as being “inconsequential” IS to state, explicitly, that that person, thing, or event “does not matter.” Stating that OBL is inconsequential actually goes FARTHER than simply stating that his capture does not matter. The latter comment (the headline) refers to a specific instance (”capture”), but Cheney dismissed OBL ENTIRELY — not just his capture, but dismissed the man himself as inconsequential (which implies that everything the man does is inconsequential…. odd position to be taking). Furthermore, taking OBL as an inconsequential person is explicitly granting him a verbal pardon of sorts for the murders he is liable for. If OBL was behind 9/11, dismissing him as suddenly inconsequential is allowing him to go free even though he is a criminal.

Why would Cheney think that OBL is inconsequential? How many people do you have to murder to become “consequential”?

By: avchavis

avchavis — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:32:47 +0000

I don’t believe it was ever their intention to capture Bin Laden in the first place! Bush and Cheney just need to stop lying! It’s been 7 years since 9/11 and they have not found Bin Laden yet! The invasion of Iraq was just another cover up of their secret agenda to control the oil supply in that region – that’s my theory.

By: chucko33

chucko33 — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:23:32 +0000

Amanda, your headline is a lie, and I can’t believe I have to defend this guy here, but nowhere did Cheney ever say – and I’ve watched this clip several times now – that it doesn’t matter if we’ve captured Osama.

By: ElBruce

ElBruce — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:07:09 +0000

You know, he could have said “there’s more important work out there to be done” to help push the meme that neocontinuity needs to carry over into Obama’s term, but no, he had to claim Bin Laden is “inconsequential.”

The guy who did the thing that you use to justify everything else you’ve ever done. I’d say that’s pretty consequential. If Bin Laden is inconsequential then terrorism is inconsequental. If Bin Laden is inconsequential then Gitmo, warrantless wiretapping, extraordinary rendition, telecom immunity, torture, suspension of habeus corpus, and signing statements don’t even have the justification that you claim they have.

The thing is, they still believe that instead of dealing with reality, they can just create it by decree.

By: roscoe

roscoe — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:54:18 +0000

Not killing Bin Laden is just another failure that this arrogant administration will never admit to.

Our nation needs to move on & bury bush/cheney for good.

By: DaveG

DaveG — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:55:13 +0000

So, does the media continue to interview the likes of Cheney, Bush, Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin in an effort to get useful knowledge and wisdom? Or is it their sick little joke on the viewing population-tricking them into thinking that these idiots are going to say something that we didn’t already know? Personally, I don’t even care to hear the words “Cheney” and/or “Bush” until the word “indictment” follows.

By: dbadass

dbadass — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:11:19 +0000

You aren’t allowed to actually kill the boogeyman because then you don’t have the boogeyman to be frightened by. Oh and what color alert are we at I sort of forgot? I also have a lot of other jobs that I would like to use this duct tape and plastic sheeting for. Can I get going with those or do I have to keep saving this shit?

By: ucsbclassics53

ucsbclassics53 — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 08:26:15 +0000

If John Kerry had been in office and had not caught Osama Bin Laden by now, LTDan would have been crying about how this IS ABOUT One person…

By: Keith

Keith — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 06:55:01 +0000

LTDan, It is the Bush/Cheneys of this world who act like we are up against a single “mad man”—and need to oust him in order to liberate his people (Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Ahmadinnerjacket). Progressives most definitely do not look at the world like that “great man” model. They look at the world more in a sociological model—like “the US supports those most friendly to big US business”.

By: DaTruth

DaTruth — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 04:16:44 +0000

You bet it doesn’t matter! BushCo., Cheney and the PNAC relied heavily on Bin Laden’s services on 9/11. They are very satisfied customers. How can they possibly go after him?

By: telestai2

telestai2 — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 04:03:00 +0000

Hey, Ralph–post #47 ROCKS!

By: telestai2

telestai2 — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 03:59:53 +0000

Max-1: THANK YOU for pointing out the “Bush Scandals List.” Having experienced Shrub’s destructive policies and pretensions as “Gov” when I lived in Texas, I strove fruitlessly to warn friends, colleagues, and family what would happen if they voted in Herr Shrub as President. If the bushco destruction had been less catastrophic; if the evils promulgated by bushco’s virulent ignorance, selfishness, and total lack of morals had been less devastating, surpassing even my pessimistic predictions, I’d be enjoying a well-earned last laugh. But there’s nothing funny about what bushco AND THOSE WHO VOTED IN A SECOND ROUND OF SAME have done to our nation, to our status in the world, to our influence for good, and to our reputation.

By: Perry logan

Perry logan — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 03:35:40 +0000

Conspiracy buffs especially like the idea that Osama is dead. They’ve been saying he’s dead for years–though, oddly, they each have different versions of what happened to him and when.

My favorite conspiracy guy is radio host Alex Jones, known for making incredible statements with no documentation whatsoever (”The government keeps giant, honeycombed hives of toddlers drugged on lithium”). Alex said they were going to “roll bin Laden out on ice” before the 2004 election. I was especially sorry that prediction didn’t turn out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVPy-ejcbjM

By: telestai2

telestai2 — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 03:35:34 +0000

Hey, Oval12345678 aka James K. Sayre: I checked out your recommended Website. . . since its contributors and/or organizers CONSISTENTLY fail even to use their own language correctly, readers should put NO confidence in ANY information reported on that site.

By: ralph the wonder llama

ralph the wonder llama — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 02:42:11 +0000

ANlMAL Says:

TP gets bashed for being a left wing spin rag for the simple fact that they choose to use titles like the one above. Fine if that is what you all want…enjoy, but know that the assertion is false and makes the left look just as bad as fauxnews makes the right look. If that’s your bag enjoy it.

I agree that TP takes too many unwarranted liberties with its headlines. I’ve complained about this myself.

But TP IS a “left wing spin rag”. It’s got a point of view and presents news from that perspective. It doesn’t present itself as an unbiased news organ.

Thus, if an unabashedly partisan website looks just as bad as Faux News, that’s not really a good reflection on Faux News, is it? All that “Fair and Balanced™” crap notwithstanding, of course.

By: thomthum

thomthum — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 01:55:13 +0000

…of course OBL COULD turn up dead in the next week or so….