Jump to content

The religion of peace.


Gary M

Recommended Posts

Who made up the WMD threat again?

 

 

 

http://www.snopes.co...r/wmdquotes.asp

 

You mean democrats and republicans were in total agreement regarding the threat posed by Saddam's regime? So both parties must have colluded to lie?

 

Seems a little far fetched. What other explanations could there be?

 

 

Don't you know that getting Bin Laden, using drones very effectively, invading Iraq and spending more money on defense than anyone else makes us look weak? Little Joey Six Pack is just embarressed (sp) over this. Maybe he should also be embarressed (sp) over his spelling and grammar. His posts are not only painful to read due to their content, but require an interpretation of what words he was trying to use to convey his thoughtless dribble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 304
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That famously predicted 3 a.m. phone call went to voice mail.

 

Timeline: Obama Admin Took 16 Hours to Disavow Embassy Apology

 

 

 

A timeline of yesterday's events shows that it took the Obama administration 16 hours to disavow a statement posted on the US Embassy in Cairo website. It appears that the administration's failure to correct the embassy and the doubling down by embassy staff 13 hours after the statement was published prompted Mitt Romney's curt comments about the administration's response.

 

{snip}

 

In any case, the media is demanding to know why Romney jumped on this so soon rather than wait. No one seems to be asking why, instead, it took the Obama administration 16 hours to disavow an obviously offensive and indeed stupid statement. Was no one at the State Dept. in contact with the Cairo Embassy in the 13 hours before they reaffirmed the initial statement at 7pm? Apparently word had not gotten back to the "tweeter" that the administration was not thrilled.

 

 

 

I, for one, think that we should cut the administration some slack, after all it takes time to conduct a poll and gather a focus group.

 

.

 

 

Edited by B-Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knowing your background a little bit as I do, Chicot, what is your opinion on what can be done (if anything) to correct this problem? Is it hopeless?

 

It's a difficult question. The ultimate aim should be a world where any nutjob can make a video, cartoon, blog....etc saying whatever they like about Islam and muslims will just say "so what?" as a response. Sadly, I don't think that's going to happen any day soon. In the absence of that, the only thing that can be done is to put pressure on nations to not let any demonstrations get out of hand. Ironically enough, dictators are a lot better at that sort of thing - it's hard to imagine that this would have happened in Libya had Gaddafi still been in power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is also talk that this may be a planned attack coordinated by our friends from the Islamic brotherhood or al qaida. This was to coincide with the anniversary of Sept 11 and the mob was chanting " Obama we are all osamas" or something similar.

 

Maybe because we've spent the past two weeks spiking the "We killed Osama Bin Laden" football over and over at the convention? Maybe because Joe Biden keeps screaming "Osama Bin Laden is Dead and GM Is alive" everyday? Maybe because a Seal is on TV pusing a book that details how we killed Bin Laden? Or maybe because it was the anniversary of 9/11 and anyone with a lick of sense realizes it was a coordinated attack?

 

No. It was a movie. Because movies cause violence.

 

You have to be a monster-sized dumbass to think that stupid movie clip is the cause of what's happening.

 

Hey...anyone know what time Obama is on Leno tonight? Is he flying straight to the studios from the Las Vegas party?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

States don't wage war on mobs. I know that's sort of the idea behind the "war on terrorism," but look how great that's going...

 

Which is actually why what happened at the Egyptian embassy is far more important that Stevens' being killed. The Egyptian president had forewarning and did nowhere NEAR enough to protect the embassy.

 

Libya's a crime...Egypt's an international incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is actually why what happened at the Egyptian embassy is far more important that Stevens' being killed. The Egyptian president had forewarning and did nowhere NEAR enough to protect the embassy.

 

Libya's a crime...Egypt's an international incident.

 

Great point--though, what's the punitive precedent for the Joe Paterno "you could have done more" offense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great point--though, what's the punitive precedent for the Joe Paterno "you could have done more" offense?

 

It depends. If you're Genghis Khan, you destroy the country so thoroughly that there's no historical memory of it.

 

 

Genghis pretty much invented "diplomatic immunity."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently Obama has no need for regular intel briefings.

 

http://www.washingto...54e1_story.html

 

When I asked National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor if the president had attended any meetings to discuss the Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) since Sept. 5, he repeatedly refused to answer. He noted that Obama had attended a principals meeting of the National Security Council on Sept. 10 and reiterated that he reads the PDB. “As I’ve told you every time you ask, the President gets his PDB every day,” Vietor told me by e-mail, adding this swipe at Obama’s predecessor, George W. Bush: “Unlike your former boss, he has it delivered to his residence in the morning and not briefed to him.” (This new line of defense was echoed this morning by my Post colleague, Dana Milbank, who writes that Bush was briefed every dayby his intelligence advisers because he “decided he would prefer to read less.”)

 

Vietor’s reply is quite revealing. It is apparently a point of pride in the White House that Obama’s PDB is “not briefed to him.” In the eyes of this administration, it is a virtue that the president does not meet every day with senior intelligence officials. This president, you see, does not need briefers. He can forgo his daily intelligence meeting because he is, in Vietor’s words, “among the most sophisticated consumers of intelligence on the planet.”

Holy smokes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

do you all want some cheese with that whine?

 

WWMD? Myth Romney would do what exactly? Start carpet bombing Libya and Palistine and Iran and Jordan and Syria and Yemen and Pakistan and Somalia and Sudan and Egypt and Indonesia and North Korea and

 

 

Obama made his statement AFTER he got the intelligence reports. Myth reacted w/o the facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently Obama has no need for regular intel briefings.

 

http://www.washingto...54e1_story.html

 

[/size][/font][/color]

Holy smokes.

 

The only thing this article opinion piece proves posits is the disproportionate relationship between foreign policy success and security briefings. Thanks for bringing that to light.

Edited by The Big Cat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

do you all want some cheese with that whine?

 

WWMD? Myth Romney would do what exactly? Start carpet bombing Libya and Palistine and Iran and Jordan and Syria and Yemen and Pakistan and Somalia and Sudan and Egypt and Indonesia and North Korea and

 

 

Obama made his statement AFTER he got the intelligence reports. Myth reacted w/o the facts.

 

Yet when Bush was slow to react after 9/11, they made a movie about it :lol:

 

And where is Palestine?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently Obama has no need for regular intel briefings.

 

http://www.washingto...54e1_story.html

 

[/size][/font][/color]

Holy smokes.

except that there's no longer daily in-person briefings

 

In reality, Obama didn’t “attend” these meetings, because there were no meetings to attend: The oral briefings had been mostly replaced by daily exchanges in which Obama reads the materials and poses written questions and comments to intelligence officials. This is how it was done in the Clinton administration, before Bush decided he would prefer to read less.

 

verified by the Press Secretary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just because someone like Millbank explains that "this is just the way things are done by Clinton and Obama" doesn't necessarily make it the right thing to do.

 

The Middle East is on fire. Four Americans were killed on the anniversary of 9/11 because no one in DC was prepared for the attacks. Maybe, y'know, he should have some meetings with people. Face to face. Hear what is happening as it's happening as opposed to, y'know, reading a piece of paper. Seems to me you might want to cover your bases on the anniversary of 9/11.

 

Unless you're somehow under the impression that having four Americans murdered in a coordinated terrorist plot is, y'know, not that big a deal and something we can review on a Blackberry. In which case, you're absolutely correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...