If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   President Obama handed a PDB titled "Al Qaeda determined to strike in US by July 2010." Let's see what happens   (usatoday.com) divider line 445
    More: Obvious, CIA Director Leon Panetta, South Carolina Republican, FBI Director Robert Mueller, FBI director, military tribunals, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, Dianne Feinstein, al-Qaeda  
•       •       •

16110 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Feb 2010 at 7:23 AM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



445 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-02-03 11:29:19 AM
Skleenar: FishingWithFredo: I know you're thick, but did you see the bolded part about the official at the National Archives who gave Sandy Burglar access to the documents, who said there's no way to tell whether he took and/or destroyed originals?

Not to mention, if we follow your "logic," why did Burglar break national security laws and put himself at risk of arrest to destroy copies?

The Berger memos are one of the Holy Grails of Bush Apologists. What exactly do you think could have been in those memos that would have been so damaging to Clinton? And why, if there were some incriminating evidence in them, would other documents not also document the presumed malfeasance. It is a study in fantasy to see people assert that these documents must have had something incriminating on them, despite having no evidence at all that this is the case. Occam's razor would suggest that their destruction was warranted by the fact they were secret documents and he did not want them to be made public.

Sandy Berger behaved badly, and was taken to task for his misbehavior. But you and your ilk have constructed a conspiracy theory with about as much basis in fact as 9/11 truthers.


Why shove them in your pants if they are not incriminating?
 
2010-02-03 11:29:39 AM
YoMammaObama: Yeah, keep farking that chicken jim... Just don't dress it all up and pretend it is something it isn't. Oh wait, you can't help it can you?

I spent last weekend with one of Ernie Anastos' colleagues. Ernie has yet to offer any explanation as to what the phrase means. Figured I'd give everyone an update on that.
 
2010-02-03 11:30:15 AM
Skleenar: The Berger memos are one of the Holy Grails of Bush Apologists. What exactly do you think could have been in those memos that would have been so damaging to Clinton?

I guess you'd have to ask Burglar that, given that he violated national security laws in order to get them and destroy them.

So those of your ilk aren't particularly concerned with what Burglar might have been up to, and why? Because it could have the net effect of making Clinton look more culpable for 9/11 and that evil Bush less culpable?
 
2010-02-03 11:31:06 AM
I_C_Weener: Nope. But everyweek is blame George Bush week, so I thought I'd put some perspective on it. Who is the bigger loser? The moron, or the ones who can't find a way to beat the moron?

Well, the moron happened to have a nice smear campaign orchestrated for him against one of those opponents. Plus, that folksy "don't change horses midstream" bit helped.

(Plus, they should've run Dean)
 
2010-02-03 11:31:34 AM
fracto73: Ok, I will spot you Ted Kennedy. You are still down one. Who would that be?

Not sure where the other seat went. I'm blaming it on the independent senators in Connecticut and Vermont.
 
2010-02-03 11:31:52 AM
I_C_Weener: nygenxer: If President Obama reads the PDB without moving his lips, he's already way ahead of our former highly-functioning retarded commander in chief.

Ah, yes. He is so stupid that he only beat your best and brightest...twice...and pretty much passed whatever legislation he wanted...even without a super-majority. What a moron.


You forgot that Bush also tricked Obama into voting for those spending bills that Obama is now complaining about (you know, the people who created the mess, the broom story, etc)
 
2010-02-03 11:32:06 AM
YoMammaObama: Yeah, keep farking that chicken jim... Just don't dress it all up and pretend it is something it isn't. Oh wait, you can't help it can you?

Between chickens and unicorns, I'm guessing you have restraining orders preventing you from going to most petting zoos...
 
2010-02-03 11:32:30 AM
fracto73: That is an awesome link!
There were still not 60 democrats.


So this is the talking point I've been waiting for. True as it is, it is still a large majority, even now, than Bush ever enjoyed. And yet, the only thing coming out of Congress is spending bills. I weep for our future. Well, I would if I didn't enjoy schadenfreud so much.
 
2010-02-03 11:32:52 AM
skullkrusher: the_falling_duck: /I would cry for my civil liberties if that happened, because I could see them just melt away.

or... perhaps relaxation of gun control laws? ;)


Eh, there's no real reason that people need automatic weapons. Simple handgun would be enough.

/I don't see everyone packing heat and pissing themselves scared as being a good combination.
 
2010-02-03 11:33:04 AM
FishingWithFredo: Because it could have the net effect of making Clinton look more culpable for 9/11 and that evil Bush less culpable?

While the former could have happened, there's pretty much no way the latter would.
 
2010-02-03 11:33:08 AM
IXI Jim IXI: I_C_Weener: Nope. But everyweek is blame George Bush week, so I thought I'd put some perspective on it. Who is the bigger loser? The moron, or the ones who can't find a way to beat the moron?

Well, the moron happened to have a nice smear campaign orchestrated for him against one of those opponents. Plus, that folksy "don't change horses midstream" bit helped.

(Plus, they should've run Dean)


Excuses like assholes Jim, everyones got one.

\Dean would have been destroyed by an even greater margin
 
2010-02-03 11:34:01 AM
tenpoundsofcheese: You forgot that Bush also tricked Obama into voting for those spending bills that Obama is now complaining about (you know, the people who created the mess, the broom story, etc)

Tricksy Bushes. They ruin everything with their sneaksy scheming.
 
2010-02-03 11:34:49 AM
I_C_Weener: fracto73: That is an awesome link!
There were still not 60 democrats.

So this is the talking point I've been waiting for. True as it is, it is still a large majority, even now, than Bush ever enjoyed. And yet, the only thing coming out of Congress is spending bills. I weep for our future. Well, I would if I didn't enjoy schadenfreud so much.


The democrats don't march in lockstep like the GOP does. Goppers generally vote for whomever their masters tell them to.
 
2010-02-03 11:35:03 AM
Joe Blowme: Excuses like assholes Jim, everyones got one.

The GOP must be practically full of excuses these days...
 
2010-02-03 11:35:52 AM
I_C_Weener: Tricksy Bushes. They ruin everything with their sneaksy scheming.

That's crazy.

Everyone knows that it's Barney Frank who is destroying the world.
 
2010-02-03 11:35:53 AM
the_falling_duck: Eh, there's no real reason that people need automatic weapons. Simple handgun would be enough.

/I don't see everyone packing heat and pissing themselves scared as being a good combination.


no one said anything about auto weapons.
 
2010-02-03 11:35:55 AM
IXI Jim IXI: FishingWithFredo: Because it could have the net effect of making Clinton look more culpable for 9/11 and that evil Bush less culpable?

While the former could have happened, there's pretty much no way the latter would.


Only people culpable for 9/11 are the death cultists who perpetrated the attack and the death cult ideology.
 
2010-02-03 11:36:29 AM
FishingWithFredo: So those of your ilk aren't particularly concerned...

Dude, tighten your tin foil, the G men are stealing your thoughts!
 
2010-02-03 11:37:09 AM
IXI Jim IXI: Everyone knows that it's Barney Frank who is destroying the world.

I thought it was George Soros.
 
2010-02-03 11:37:26 AM
IXI Jim IXI: Joe Blowme: Excuses like assholes Jim, everyones got one.

The GOP must be practically full of excuses these days...


Both parties are, 99.95% of politicians are asshats.
 
2010-02-03 11:38:05 AM
Antimatter: I_C_Weener: fracto73: That is an awesome link!
There were still not 60 democrats.

So this is the talking point I've been waiting for. True as it is, it is still a large majority, even now, than Bush ever enjoyed. And yet, the only thing coming out of Congress is spending bills. I weep for our future. Well, I would if I didn't enjoy schadenfreud so much.

The democrats don't march in lockstep like the GOP does. Goppers generally vote for whomever their masters tell them to.


So, you admit that Democrats can't get anything done and Republicans are the party of progress?
 
2010-02-03 11:38:34 AM
skullkrusher: no one said anything about auto weapons.

3.bp.blogspot.com
Has a thing for auto weapons
(and cords)
 
2010-02-03 11:39:07 AM
IXI Jim IXI: I_C_Weener: Tricksy Bushes. They ruin everything with their sneaksy scheming.

That's crazy.

Everyone knows that it's Barney Frank who is destroying the world.


Just the housing market while blowing Freddie and Fannie
 
2010-02-03 11:39:14 AM
IXI Jim IXI: I_C_Weener: Tricksy Bushes. They ruin everything with their sneaksy scheming.

That's crazy.

Everyone knows that it's Barney Frank who is destroying the world.


Hey, serious question (which came to me when you mentioned Frank, who claimed Mass would not delay seating their new senator) why isn't Brown seated yet?
 
2010-02-03 11:39:15 AM
www.onepennysheet.com

What Obama may look like in July 2010.

/he even has that "gazing towards the future" look Obama has perfected
 
2010-02-03 11:40:27 AM
NeedleGuy: HansensDisease: At least he won't be stupid enough to attack a country that had nothing to do with it.

Give him time. Iran is starting to get uppity.

/hasn't seen the O man do anything different than W so far.


Except for that whole "start 2 wars" bit, I agree with you.
 
2010-02-03 11:40:30 AM
IXI Jim IXI: skullkrusher: no one said anything about auto weapons.


Has a thing for auto weapons
(and cords)


Gimp 2000?
 
2010-02-03 11:40:39 AM
Joe Blowme: Just the housing market while blowing Freddie and Fannie

Democrats can't get anything done with a supermajority (while simultaneously turning us into a communist paradise and destroying our way of life), but one senator in a minority party can somehow deny the will of a President and destroy our economy.

That's pretty much it, right?
 
2010-02-03 11:40:48 AM
Trollomite: He is going to try and contact them and have a meeting, because liberals think you can actually talk to these terrorist vermin, even though terrorist have stated they do not want to talk, they want blood! If they were moderates they wouldn't be terrorists! Hugs and understanding do not solve every problem hippies!

0/10
 
2010-02-03 11:42:47 AM
I_C_Weener: Hey, serious question (which came to me when you mentioned Frank, who claimed Mass would not delay seating their new senator) why isn't Brown seated yet?

To be fair, I haven't been following the Brown situation much...mostly due to the fact that it happened to coincide with a period when I didn't have much spare time ;)
 
2010-02-03 11:42:48 AM
I_C_Weener: fracto73: That is an awesome link!
There were still not 60 democrats.

So this is the talking point I've been waiting for. True as it is, it is still a large majority, even now, than Bush ever enjoyed. And yet, the only thing coming out of Congress is spending bills. I weep for our future. Well, I would if I didn't enjoy schadenfreud so much.



He sure as shiat could have gotten things done. The bill they ended up with a a piece of crap with giveaways to everyone. It is pathetic that they couldn't get the Democrats to play ball. That's why I held my tongue while the "supermajority" BS kept being repeated. There is a point where you have to call out a liar though.

tenpoundsofcheese is either mistaken or lying on purpose.
 
2010-02-03 11:43:55 AM
tedbundee: NeedleGuy: HansensDisease: At least he won't be stupid enough to attack a country that had nothing to do with it.

Give him time. Iran is starting to get uppity.

/hasn't seen the O man do anything different than W so far.

Except for that whole "start 2 wars" bit, I agree with you.


Give him time. W only started one war in his first year. You people keep saying to give Obama time. Well, lets let him have his chance.
 
2010-02-03 11:43:58 AM
Farkomatic:
So, even after Iraq complied fully with the UN demands - a 13,000 page dossier discounted by Bush as full of lies, but turned out to be far more truthful than our intelligence services - and no WMD could be found even with unfettered access, Bush pulled the trigger. The only way this could be done legally is attacking in self defense - 100% connected to Iraq's ability to induce terror with WMD.
.


So what is your opinion of the Bush Doctrine Sarah?

Uh, umm...

You know...
"Later it came to include additional elements, including the controversial policy of preventive war, which held that the United States should depose foreign regimes that represented a potential or perceived threat to the security of the United States, even if that threat was not immediate".

Arbitrarily killing someone because you have a hunch they kinda maybe sorta might be a threat to you at some time in the future is not self defense. It's unprecedented in our history and it's not legal. Go shoot somebody and try that defense in a court.

What really sucks though is it was a poor chess move. Suddam had Iran in check. Now look where we are. It was a doublecross and mob hit by an oil baron and his cronies for personal gain with the U.S. military as cannon fodder pawns.
 
2010-02-03 11:44:14 AM
fracto73: There is a point where you have to call out a liar though.

Yeah...but the State of the Union already passed :D
 
2010-02-03 11:44:19 AM
skullkrusher: the_falling_duck: Eh, there's no real reason that people need automatic weapons. Simple handgun would be enough.

/I don't see everyone packing heat and pissing themselves scared as being a good combination.

no one said anything about auto weapons.


That's the first thing that comes to my mind when people discuss relaxing gun control.

/Seriously, people can buy guns, but need background checks to make sure they are not felons.
//What else do you think needs to be lifted? Bans on concealed carry?
 
2010-02-03 11:45:15 AM
I_C_Weener: IXI Jim IXI: I_C_Weener: Tricksy Bushes. They ruin everything with their sneaksy scheming.

That's crazy.

Everyone knows that it's Barney Frank who is destroying the world.

Hey, serious question (which came to me when you mentioned Frank, who claimed Mass would not delay seating their new senator) why isn't Brown seated yet?


Frank probably feels that counting the absentee ballots does not fall under the delaying umbrella.
 
2010-02-03 11:45:57 AM
skullkrusher: YoMammaObama: Yeah, keep farking that chicken jim... Just don't dress it all up and pretend it is something it isn't. Oh wait, you can't help it can you?

I spent last weekend with one of Ernie Anastos' colleagues. Ernie has yet to offer any explanation as to what the phrase means. Figured I'd give everyone an update on that.


www.localseoguide.com

I'm friends with Merlin Olsen.
 
2010-02-03 11:47:54 AM
IXI Jim IXI: YoMammaObama: Yeah, keep farking that chicken jim... Just don't dress it all up and pretend it is something it isn't. Oh wait, you can't help it can you?

Between chickens and unicorns, I'm guessing you have restraining orders preventing you from going to most petting zoos...


I know your mom told you it was a unicorn at the "petting zoo"... And you still believe her and all... but...

www.petemandik.com

Oh, okokok... You are righ, you are right, it is a unicorn. Don't cry. Just don't cry, jim, jeez.
 
2010-02-03 11:49:10 AM
YoMammaObama: I know your mom told you it was a unicorn at the "petting zoo"... And you still believe her and all... but...

Either way, it was still wrong of you to sit on its head.
 
2010-02-03 11:50:39 AM
fasahd: Farkomatic:
So, even after Iraq complied fully with the UN demands - a 13,000 page dossier discounted by Bush as full of lies, but turned out to be far more truthful than our intelligence services - and no WMD could be found even with unfettered access, Bush pulled the trigger. The only way this could be done legally is attacking in self defense - 100% connected to Iraq's ability to induce terror with WMD.
.

So what is your opinion of the Bush Doctrine Sarah?

Uh, umm...

You know...
"Later it came to include additional elements, including the controversial policy of preventive war, which held that the United States should depose foreign regimes that represented a potential or perceived threat to the security of the United States, even if that threat was not immediate".

Arbitrarily killing someone because you have a hunch they kinda maybe sorta might be a threat to you at some time in the future is not self defense. It's unprecedented in our history and it's not legal. Go shoot somebody and try that defense in a court.

What really sucks though is it was a poor chess move. Suddam had Iran in check. Now look where we are. It was a doublecross and mob hit by an oil baron and his cronies for personal gain with the U.S. military as cannon fodder pawns.


Yea, now the Irainian people are standing up to the islamic thugs risking death. But that had nothing to do with liberating Iraq.
 
2010-02-03 11:50:49 AM
StoPPeRmobile: hmmmm, $734,000,000 to look at naked people.

That's over $2,000,000 per person. I could buy a nice plane of my own for that. Give me my two million and I'll never fly commercial again.

/Promises if payed, to do that.
//Knows it's exactly but completely different than raising the minimum wage.
///Still want his 2 million.


You were never good at math, were you?
 
2010-02-03 11:50:57 AM
I_C_Weener: tedbundee: NeedleGuy: HansensDisease: At least he won't be stupid enough to attack a country that had nothing to do with it.

Give him time. Iran is starting to get uppity.

/hasn't seen the O man do anything different than W so far.

Except for that whole "start 2 wars" bit, I agree with you.

Give him time. W only started one war in his first year. You people keep saying to give Obama time. Well, lets let him have his chance.


static.open.salon.com

/so its not too early to call Obama a success, but its the appropriate time to call him a failure? am I missing something here?
//hotlinked
 
2010-02-03 11:51:08 AM
YoMammaObama: IXI Jim IXI: YoMammaObama: No, the other alternative is providing a citation (Like I did) that shows a court handing down a sentence for Bush officials destroying documents (like I did). But you don't cite your false claim because it is false. You have nothing to cite.

Yep...False. (new window)

"hey...look what we just found (four years later!)"

But keep up your dreams of unicorns.

LOL. Your link doesn't show anyone being fined for intentionally destroying documents. Mine clearly does. YOU FAIL. I know you are not this stupid, but you sure are disingenuous.


The unicorn dreams are Fractos, not mine Jim. Perhaps you can feed it your apple?


Worth noting:

"According to the lead prosecutor in the case Berger only took copies of classified information and no original material was destroyed."

source (new window)

at the end of the day, it looks like even the prosecutor did not think Berger was trying to destroy evidence. He took copies. What he did was wrong, but in the grand scheme of things, I think it is a far bigger issue to attempt to obfuscate or destroy original documents because they may be evidence that you did something illegal.
 
2010-02-03 11:51:40 AM
tedbundee:
/so its not too early to call Obama a success, but its the appropriate time to call him a failure? am I missing something here?
//hotlinked


ftfm
 
2010-02-03 11:51:46 AM
IXI Jim IXI: YoMammaObama: I know your mom told you it was a unicorn at the "petting zoo"... And you still believe her and all... but...

Either way, it was still wrong of you to sit on its head.



Your conversation has inspired me to do a GIS for "unicorn". While most of the results were what one might expect I feel I must share this one, on account of its intrinsic WTF!?
metro.typepad.com
 
2010-02-03 11:53:03 AM
the_falling_duck: skullkrusher: the_falling_duck: Eh, there's no real reason that people need automatic weapons. Simple handgun would be enough.

/I don't see everyone packing heat and pissing themselves scared as being a good combination.

no one said anything about auto weapons.

That's the first thing that comes to my mind when people discuss relaxing gun control.

/Seriously, people can buy guns, but need background checks to make sure they are not felons.
//What else do you think needs to be lifted? Bans on concealed carry?


it was meant more in the case of a place like NYC or DC which have very strict carry laws. Not so much allowing people to walk down the street with a Mac-10.
 
2010-02-03 11:54:52 AM
stewmadness: skullkrusher: YoMammaObama: Yeah, keep farking that chicken jim... Just don't dress it all up and pretend it is something it isn't. Oh wait, you can't help it can you?

I spent last weekend with one of Ernie Anastos' colleagues. Ernie has yet to offer any explanation as to what the phrase means. Figured I'd give everyone an update on that.



I'm friends with Merlin Olsen.


yeah... having a tangential acquaintanceship with a local news guy is totally worthy a namedrop.
It really was just an update on the chicken thing and I had to give the reason why I knew this.

funny response though.
 
2010-02-03 12:02:42 PM
skullkrusher: it was meant more in the case of a place like NYC or DC which have very strict carry laws. Not so much allowing people to walk down the street with a Mac-10.

Eh, I don't know how I feel about relaxing carry laws in those places. Response time for police is high. Security in those places is also pretty high.

/Something to read more into, but I don't feel that even open carry on the national mall or in NYC is necessary.
 
2010-02-03 12:06:01 PM
I_C_Weener: the_falling_duck: fracto73: He will take the threat seriously and give instructions to ramp up security. The head of the TSA will increase security at airports, screening more closely for terrorist suspects.

Why does everyone think that an attack will happen with planes again? Seriously, a group of coordinated attacks on multiple malls with gunmen would be more effective in the TERROR part of terrorism.

Targets that are easier than flying planes into high rises:
-Little League games (it is America's past time)
-NFL/NBA/MLB/MLS games
-Schools, like they did in Russia (Chechnya?)
-the Mall of America...a la that zombie movie remake
-Boston commons with electronics
-Cruise ships
-regular ships...think of the mess if we had to increase security to all the shipping out there
-destroy a commuter train track just before a fully loaded AMTRACK passes by
-daycare and offices at a small midwestern city's government center
-college games



Man, that is so true. I've thought it and said it for years now. Terror groups really want to mess with the US psyche, they don't keep trying to strike high profile big coastal cities. I mean, yeah, they can try, but security is much higher and it's much tougher to do.

No. You want to mess with the US, you take a small plane (easily done) load it with explosives of various shapes and sizes and plenty of nails, and airburst the sucker at 100 feet at the fifty yard line of a well attended college football game in Indiana or Missouri or Utah, etc. Or you suicide bomb a church service in a small town in Kansas. Or you Oklahoma City-style car bomb a well attended high school basketball game in Ohio.

Makes me feel bad just posting this, but it's truth.
 
2010-02-03 12:09:40 PM
I_C_Weener:
So, you admit that Democrats can't get anything done and Republicans are the party of progress?


I think his point was that republicans are very good at making sure nothing important gets done by being a bunch of mindless drones.
 
Displayed 50 of 445 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report