3rdnlng Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 This whole thing seems to be going way over your head. Let me see if I can break it down to kindergarten level for you. Googling does not equal tracking back source. What you want to do is try to find where Infowars got it's information. And if so needed, where the sight that infowars used for it's piece got it's information. The argument isn't that the root source is infowars. It's the fact that infowars was way out in left field and all you have to do is look back a few levels to find that out. You stupid schit. Your's & Tom's argument now has nothing to do with Infowars, but it's based on Infowars being "way out in left field"? Listen, there are several sources for the premise here that a schitload of ammunition is being purchased over a period of time. You can take Infowars and stick them up your ass. I don't care what they have reported and what you have to say about them. You and Tommy not only don't have the ability to read, your comprehension levels are more than lacking. You are doubling down on a bad bet as you are shooting off your mouths while jumping up and down and throwing a hissy fit, all as you are positioned directly on top of quicksand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 Someone post the truth, and we will see who is right. I have to go to work. I will check back at lunch. Homework assigned. Don't disappoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 22, 2013 Author Share Posted February 22, 2013 I can't find the RFQ for the 1.6 billion rounds purportedly planned to be bought by the DHS over the next 4-5 years. The original story I cited claimed they were buying an additional 21.6 million rounds of hollow points. Tom correctly observed it was for just 216k rounds of hollow points (thousands being the unit and not a thousand units of a thousand). Whew! I feel better. That's more than I have on hand at the moment, but nonetheless a reasonable amount. But back to the 1.6 billion rounds. Seems like a lot to me. And what about the assault rifles? I know, I know. It's so the various federal agencies aren't outgunned in a firefight, and hollow points theoretically cause less collateral damage. So the feds need these things because they need them. And gun owners are paranoid by virtue of their ownership of guns. Check. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 I can't find the RFQ for the 1.6 billion rounds purportedly planned to be bought by the DHS over the next 4-5 years. The original story I cited claimed they were buying an additional 21.6 million rounds of hollow points. Tom correctly observed it was for just 216k rounds of hollow points (thousands being the unit and not a thousand units of a thousand). Whew! I feel better. That's more than I have on hand at the moment, but nonetheless a reasonable amount. But back to the 1.6 billion rounds. Seems like a lot to me. And what about the assault rifles? I know, I know. It's so the various federal agencies aren't outgunned in a firefight, and hollow points theoretically cause less collateral damage. So the feds need these things because they need them. And gun owners are paranoid by virtue of their ownership of guns. Check. My issue here is that in the article B-Man posted they quoted a spokesperson for a federal agency and sort of made fun of Infowars. Once, Infowars was introduced, Tommy and his valet, BFBF wouldn't shut up about it being an Infowars article. Horseshit, this story was picked up by numerous sources and reported on. Just because at one time Infowars had something to say about it doesn't mean the story is false. I just get sick of Tommy always standing on his pure and pristene soap box while attacking the messenger, whether right or wrong. Now Tommy posted what appears to be a request for a quote that in his mind, proves his point. What's to say there aren't a thousand other similar requests that would support the other supposition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 My issue here is that in the article B-Man posted they quoted a spokesperson for a federal agency and sort of made fun of Infowars. Once, Infowars was introduced, Tommy and his valet, BFBF wouldn't shut up about it being an Infowars article. Horseshit, this story was picked up by numerous sources and reported on. Just because at one time Infowars had something to say about it doesn't mean the story is false. I just get sick of Tommy always standing on his pure and pristene soap box while attacking the messenger, whether right or wrong. Now Tommy posted what appears to be a request for a quote that in his mind, proves his point. What's to say there aren't a thousand other similar requests that would support the other supposition? That's the main point they are hounding you for. There is only one true reality so even if there are a thousand others...it doesn't matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 That's the main point they are hounding you for. There is only one true reality so even if there are a thousand others...it doesn't matter The one true reality as far as Tommy and his groupie is that if Infowars says 1+1=2 is that it would be wrong. I'm not a supporter of Infowars, but I'm not willing to kill every messenger who may be a different color than me or speak with an accent that sounds funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frostbitmic Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 DHS needs all those guns and all that ammo to arm teachers so they can protect our children. Then they need to arm students to protect each other and their teachers. Then they need to arm the criminals to protect them from students and teachers. Then they need to arm Joe Public to protect us from criminals, teachers and students etc etc etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 You stupid schit. Your's & Tom's argument now has nothing to do with Infowars, but it's based on Infowars being "way out in left field"? Listen, there are several sources for the premise here that a schitload of ammunition is being purchased over a period of time. You can take Infowars and stick them up your ass. I don't care what they have reported and what you have to say about them. You and Tommy not only don't have the ability to read, your comprehension levels are more than lacking. You are doubling down on a bad bet as you are shooting off your mouths while jumping up and down and throwing a hissy fit, all as you are positioned directly on top of quicksand. So 100 erroneous news reports supersede the actual documentation of the purchase. Democracy in action. Tyranny of the blisteringly stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 So 100 erroneous news reports supersede the actual documentation of the purchase. Democracy in action. Tyranny of the blisteringly stupid. Is there something I'm missing here? Is an RFQ actual documentation of purchase? Does showing one RFQ prove that there are no others? Does a quote from Peggy Dixon, spokesperson for the Law Enforcement Training Center mean anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 go go go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 You stupid schit. Your's & Tom's argument now has nothing to do with Infowars, but it's based on Infowars being "way out in left field"? Listen, there are several sources for the premise here that a schitload of ammunition is being purchased over a period of time. You can take Infowars and stick them up your ass. I don't care what they have reported and what you have to say about them. You and Tommy not only don't have the ability to read, your comprehension levels are more than lacking. You are doubling down on a bad bet as you are shooting off your mouths while jumping up and down and throwing a hissy fit, all as you are positioned directly on top of quicksand. Check. The. Source. For. The. Several. Stories. And. You. Will. Find. That. They. All. Have. The. Same. Source. You. Complete. Idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 Check. The. Source. For. The. Several. Stories. And. You. Will. Find. That. They. All. Have. The. Same. Source. You. Complete. Idiot. Oh really, little boy who speaks in one word sentences, just like his hero. Try Huffington Post (that bastion of right wing conspiracy theories): http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/14/homeland-security-bullets_n_2688402.html WASHINGTON — Online rumors about a big government munitions purchase are true, sort of. The Homeland Security Department wants to buy more than 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition in the next four or five years. It says it needs them – roughly the equivalent of five bullets for every person in the United States – for law enforcement agents in training and on duty. Published federal notices about the ammo buy have agitated conspiracy theorists since the fall. That's when conservative radio host Alex Jones spoke of an "arms race against the American people" and said the government was "gearing up for total collapse, they're gearing up for huge wars." The government's explanation is much less sinister. Federal solicitations to buy the bullets are known as "strategic sourcing contracts," which help the government get a low price for a big purchase, says Peggy Dixon, spokeswoman for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Ga . The training center and others like it run by the Homeland Security Department use as many as 15 million rounds every year, mostly on shooting ranges and in training exercises. Dixon said one of the contracts would allow Homeland Security to buy up to 750 million rounds of ammunition over the next five years for its training facilities. The rounds are used for basic and advanced law enforcement training for federal law enforcement agencies under the department's umbrella. The facilities also offer firearms training to tens of thousands of federal law enforcement officers. More than 90 federal agencies and 70,000 agents and officers used the department's training center last year. The rest of the 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition would be purchased by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the federal government's second largest criminal investigative agency. ICE's ammunition requests in the last year included: _450 million rounds of .40-caliber duty ammunition _40 million rounds of rifle ammunition a year for as many as five years, for a total bullet-buy of 200 million rounds _176,000 rifle rounds on a separate contract _25,000 blank rounds The Homeland Security ammo buy is not the first time the government's bullets purchases have sparked concerns on the Internet. The same thing happened last year when the Social Security Administration posted a notice that it was buying 174,000 hollow point bullets. Jonathan L. Lasher, the agency's assistant inspector general for external relations, said those bullets were for the Social Security inspector general's office, which has about 295 agents who investigate Social Security fraud and other crimes. Jones the talk-show host did not immediately respond to requests for comment. ___ DUMB & DUMBER--This is basically the same article that was posted days ago, and again quotes federal employees that Infowars did not interview. It is from the Huffington Post. Maybe. it. is. time. to. shut. the. phuck. up. and. leave. with. your. tails. between. your. legs.----legs. that. couldn't. support. your. idiotic. position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 Oh really, little boy who speaks in one word sentences, just like his hero. Try Huffington Post (that bastion of right wing conspiracy theories): http://www.huffingto..._n_2688402.html WASHINGTON — Online rumors about a big government munitions purchase are true, sort of. The Homeland Security Department wants to buy more than 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition in the next four or five years. It says it needs them – roughly the equivalent of five bullets for every person in the United States – for law enforcement agents in training and on duty. Published federal notices about the ammo buy have agitated conspiracy theorists since the fall. That's when conservative radio host Alex Jones spoke of an "arms race against the American people" and said the government was "gearing up for total collapse, they're gearing up for huge wars." The government's explanation is much less sinister. Federal solicitations to buy the bullets are known as "strategic sourcing contracts," which help the government get a low price for a big purchase, says Peggy Dixon, spokeswoman for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Ga . The training center and others like it run by the Homeland Security Department use as many as 15 million rounds every year, mostly on shooting ranges and in training exercises. Dixon said one of the contracts would allow Homeland Security to buy up to 750 million rounds of ammunition over the next five years for its training facilities. The rounds are used for basic and advanced law enforcement training for federal law enforcement agencies under the department's umbrella. The facilities also offer firearms training to tens of thousands of federal law enforcement officers. More than 90 federal agencies and 70,000 agents and officers used the department's training center last year. The rest of the 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition would be purchased by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the federal government's second largest criminal investigative agency. ICE's ammunition requests in the last year included: _450 million rounds of .40-caliber duty ammunition _40 million rounds of rifle ammunition a year for as many as five years, for a total bullet-buy of 200 million rounds _176,000 rifle rounds on a separate contract _25,000 blank rounds The Homeland Security ammo buy is not the first time the government's bullets purchases have sparked concerns on the Internet. The same thing happened last year when the Social Security Administration posted a notice that it was buying 174,000 hollow point bullets. Jonathan L. Lasher, the agency's assistant inspector general for external relations, said those bullets were for the Social Security inspector general's office, which has about 295 agents who investigate Social Security fraud and other crimes. Jones the talk-show host did not immediately respond to requests for comment. ___ DUMB & DUMBER--This is basically the same article that was posted days ago, and again quotes federal employees that Infowars did not interview. It is from the Huffington Post. Maybe. it. is. time. to. shut. the. phuck. up. and. leave. with. your. tails. between. your. legs.----legs. that. couldn't. support. your. idiotic. position. Oh My God. You really are THAT stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 Oh My God. You really are THAT stupid. No, you dumbass. The statement was made that all articles were sourced from Infowars. I disagreed and showed quotes from government sources that were never in an article by Infowars. You think that because one (1) RFQ was posted that it proves that it was the extent of ammunition purchased, which is just wrong. Regardless, your continual repeating of "you're stupid" doesn't prove a point, other than you have no ability to digest what is presented to you and have to fall back on just calling people names. Do you have even a modicum of intellectual curiosity to think that quotes from government sources might mean something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Come In Peace Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 Why the !@#$ would you even think of confirming the story by googling for other stories that say the same thing, when you can google for the RFQs and verify directly that it's bull ****? Christ...you can't even successfully use the internet. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 (edited) Tommy, Fatty and the rest of you that are dumbschits, from the bid instructions for some of the ammunition: MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM THRESHOLDS: Each contract for .40 S&W caliber (180gr) JHP ammunition awarded under this solicitation will have a base period of one year, plus four one-year options, and a maximum threshold throughout the 5-year duration of the contract, of 450,000,000 rounds. The guaranteed minimum is 10,000 rounds of ammunition for the base period only. There is no guaranteed minimum for the option periods, if exercised. If more than one contract is awarded, the minimum guaranteed and the maximum order limits as indicated shall apply to each contract. Click on the "Instructions to Offerors". Solicitation Number: HSCEMS-11-R-00004 Notice Type: Combined Synopsis/Solicitation Synopsis: Added: Jul 12, 2011 3:37 pmThis is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items (.40 Smith & Wesson caliber (180 grain) Jacketed Hollow Point duty ammunition) prepared in accordance with the format in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 12.603, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation and proposals are being requested. See attachments for complete details. Please consult the list of document viewers if you cannot open a file. (Draft) Posted Date: July 12, 2011 Instructs to Offerors.doc (110.00 Kb) Description: Instructions to Offerors Attachment 1 Clauses.doc (127.00 Kb) Description: Attachment 1 - Ordering Procedures and FAR Clauses, Provisions, HSAR Clauses, and Terms and Conditions Attachment 2 SOW.doc (192.50 Kb) Description: Attachment 2 - Statement of Work Attachment 3 - Price Schedule.xls (35.00 Kb) Description: Attachment 3 - Price Schedule Attachment 4 - Past Performance Questionnaires.doc (53.00 Kb) Description: Attachment 4 - Past Performance Questionnaires Attachment 5 - Sample Subcontracting Plan.doc (166.00 Kb) Description: Attachment 5 - Sample Subcontracting Plan. As stated in a previous post, this is only part of the 1.6 billion combination of RFP's. Yes, there is a Federal Law Enforcement Training Center and Peggy Dixon is the spokesperson for the one in Glynco, GA. She is one of the people quoted. My contention all along has been that Infowars was not the source for everyone that posted an article on the net. Specifically, DCTom and BFBF tried to ridicule my contention by telling me I didn't know how to "source" articles and I was an idiot and blah, blah, blah. I'm sure Tommy you'll attempt to wiggle out of this somehow and BFBF will dutifully follow along. Want some ketchup on that crow? Edited February 23, 2013 by 3rdnlng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 No, you dumbass. The statement was made that all articles were sourced from Infowars. I disagreed and showed quotes from government sources that were never in an article by Infowars. You think that because one (1) RFQ was posted that it proves that it was the extent of ammunition purchased, which is just wrong. Regardless, your continual repeating of "you're stupid" doesn't prove a point, other than you have no ability to digest what is presented to you and have to fall back on just calling people names. Do you have even a modicum of intellectual curiosity to think that quotes from government sources might mean something? I can't stand Tom. But in this case I think he's totally right. You don't even know how to use the internet. I give up. But let me give you one piece of advise. Never attempt to write a scientific paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 I can't stand Tom. But in this case I think he's totally right. You don't even know how to use the internet. I give up. But let me give you one piece of advise. Never attempt to write a scientific paper. Instead, why don't you take my "advice" and read post # 56 above? Nice timing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 Tommy, Fatty and the rest of you that are dumbschits, from the bid instructions for some of the ammunition: MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM THRESHOLDS: Each contract for .40 S&W caliber (180gr) JHP ammunition awarded under this solicitation will have a base period of one year, plus four one-year options, and a maximum threshold throughout the 5-year duration of the contract, of 450,000,000 rounds. The guaranteed minimum is 10,000 rounds of ammunition for the base period only. There is no guaranteed minimum for the option periods, if exercised. If more than one contract is awarded, the minimum guaranteed and the maximum order limits as indicated shall apply to each contract. Click on the "Instructions to Offerors". Solicitation Number: HSCEMS-11-R-00004 Notice Type: Combined Synopsis/Solicitation Synopsis: Added: Jul 12, 2011 3:37 pmThis is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items (.40 Smith & Wesson caliber (180 grain) Jacketed Hollow Point duty ammunition) prepared in accordance with the format in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 12.603, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation and proposals are being requested. See attachments for complete details. Please consult the list of document viewers if you cannot open a file. (Draft) Posted Date: July 12, 2011 Instructs to Offerors.doc (110.00 Kb) Description: Instructions to Offerors Attachment 1 Clauses.doc (127.00 Kb) Description: Attachment 1 - Ordering Procedures and FAR Clauses, Provisions, HSAR Clauses, and Terms and Conditions Attachment 2 SOW.doc (192.50 Kb) Description: Attachment 2 - Statement of Work Attachment 3 - Price Schedule.xls (35.00 Kb) Description: Attachment 3 - Price Schedule Attachment 4 - Past Performance Questionnaires.doc (53.00 Kb) Description: Attachment 4 - Past Performance Questionnaires Attachment 5 - Sample Subcontracting Plan.doc (166.00 Kb) Description: Attachment 5 - Sample Subcontracting Plan. As stated in a previous post, this is only part of the 1.6 billion combination of RFP's. Yes, there is a Federal Law Enforcement Training Center and Peggy Dixon is the spokesperson for the one in Glynco, GA. She is one of the people quoted. My contention all along has been that Infowars was not the source for everyone that posted an article on the net. Specifically, DCTom and BFBF tried to ridicule my contention by telling me I didn't know how to "source" articles and I was an idiot and blah, blah, blah. I'm sure Tommy you'll attempt to wiggle out of this somehow and BFBF will dutifully follow along. Want some ketchup on that crow? No, actually I told you that you didn't know how to use the internet, and that you couldn't read. But congratulations on figuring out this whole internet thingy. Time to work on fixing that whole "illiterate buffoon" thing, because what you posted doesn't say what you think it does. Or you can just re-read the thread from last year on this topic, where I explained everything to you before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 No, actually I told you that you didn't know how to use the internet, and that you couldn't read. But congratulations on figuring out this whole internet thingy. Time to work on fixing that whole "illiterate buffoon" thing, because what you posted doesn't say what you think it does. Or you can just re-read the thread from last year on this topic, where I explained everything to you before. What I posted proves you were wrong in your original post in this thread and were wrong by claiming Fox (and others) were just repeating the Infowars story. Nice little wiggle there---what I posted doesn't say what I think it does? Then you throw in some nebulous reference to some mysterious year old thread on this topic in which you explained everything to me? Get real. You should have stayed at the rest home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts