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.

(Christian Science Monitor)   Pentagon considering legal action over secrets in "No Easy Day," according to Pentagon spokesman Barbara Streisand   (csmonitor.com) divider line 171
    More: Dumbass, Vera Wang, Naval Special Warfare Development Group, Pentagon officials, free daily  
•       •       •

7450 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Sep 2012 at 3:09 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



171 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-05 03:44:50 PM

MisterTweak: Weaver95: As I recall, the Pentagon takes this sort of thing very seriously. you sign a stack of paperwork when you get your clearance...and one of the things you sign lays it out in great detail: if you write a book or an article for newspapers and the like...you clear it first. if you don't clear it with the Powers That Be, then you risk jail time.

True 'nuff. There are any number of people who do heroic stuff for their country, and are expected to take it to their graves. If this book is what it purports to be, I think the author has done a disservice to himself and his peers.

/and may be in a world of legal hurt, too. Rightly so, I guess.


kind of a dick move, so cool now he has the first to market and everyone else there who rightfully kept quiet now don't get any payout cept this guy... what a team player...
 
2012-09-05 03:45:40 PM

The Southern Logic Company: WTF Indeed: I'll wait for the BDSM fanfic version.

No Easy Shades?


I'll wait for the porn version.

/No Easy Shades for Sasha Grey
 
2012-09-05 03:45:41 PM
If they ever decide to prosecute, he'll probably just stage his death in the Chesapeake Bay and become a CIA agent.
 
2012-09-05 03:46:15 PM

Brick-House: And will the DOJ go after the WH for the information they disclosed for the movie Zero Dark Thirty?


As this is a work of fiction with no proof of any classified information supplied to facilitate its production, what would the DOJ do, exactly?
 
2012-09-05 03:47:00 PM

lunchinlewis: If they ever decide to prosecute, he'll probably just stage his death in the Chesapeake Bay and become a CIA agent.


Mr. Clark has more class than this guy.
 
2012-09-05 03:48:04 PM

Raoul Eaton: Pathman: am i a moran? i don't get the babs reference.

Streisand Effect. An attempt to suppress publication of information results in widespread publicity for the suppressed information. Not really applicable here, because I haven't seen anything about attempts to seize the books or prevent distribution--just possible legal action against the author, which isn't really a Streisand Effect kind of thing. Subby was stretching a bit for a clever headline.
Link


oh right. so to answer my own question - yep, moran.
 
2012-09-05 03:49:14 PM
Did they ever check to see if that was really OBL they dumped overboard? Someone was supposed to go down there and check it out.
 
2012-09-05 03:50:03 PM
Im more concerned over all the leaks that have come from the WH and a good lawyer would have a field day bringing that out at trial.
 
2012-09-05 03:51:31 PM
Well the cat's out of the bag now, so they might as well let it slide. On the other hand, I wouldn't exactly be surprised to read that a domestic branch of bin Laden sympathizers took out some members of this guy's family in retribution. I may not have been a Navy SEAL, but I can figure out that if you were involved in killing a target like that you should have the brains to keep your mouth shut about it to prevent annoyed survivors from hunting you down later.
 
2012-09-05 03:52:00 PM

The Decider: What are they going to do? The book has shipped already. If they were serious about this a week ago, they would have stopped the book from shipping. This is just the Pentagon trying to wipe the egg of it's face.


A week ago? Before the story broke, before the Pentagon even knew it was happening, dozens of people had already had their hands on the manuscript. It has passed through civilian computers, been read by editors and publishers, and passed through many hands. If they stopped it then, it's just up on the internet by the next week. There was no way to keep a lid on it by the time they knew. Now, they can only go after the original leak and punish him.

The info is already considered leaked and public. Damage done. Trying to stop that info from spreading is completely futile.
 
2012-09-05 03:52:26 PM

MisterTweak:
True 'nuff. There are any number of people who do heroic stuff for their country, and are expected to take it to their graves. If this book is what it purports to be, I think the author has done a disservice to himself and his peers.


How so?

The path to victory is to train and train and train. Secret techniques gain you nothing.
 
2012-09-05 03:53:36 PM

netizencain: Of course he'd be a hero to everyone if it was released to Wikileaks.


Bradley Manning is in prison. This guy is walking free.
That's the reality - f**k the fantasy.
 
2012-09-05 03:54:05 PM

Brick-House: Im more concerned over all the leaks that have come from the WH and a good lawyer would have a field day bringing that out at trial.


Yes, that would get very far in a military court.
 
2012-09-05 03:56:14 PM

IvanTheSilent: Carth: Yellow Beard: The author would never see a trial. Can you imagine a jury convicting one of the SEALs that took out Osama? yea, neither can I.

not saying what he did was right, just saying I cannot imagine him getting convicted at a jury trial

Do you think they'd try him in civilian court vs a military tribunal?

Nope, recall to active duty to stand on the charges. If found guilty, most likely he'd receive a reduction in rank to E-1, forfeiture of all pay, allowances and benefits, dishonorable discharge or general discharge under other than honorable, and confinement of up to 5 years (suspended.) They wouldn't actually jail him and would likely give him a general discharge citing "abuse of a special position of trust" and "acts or omissions that endanger the security of the United States or the health and welfare of other members of the Military Services." In the end, the Pentagon will be able to say "Hey, we followed procedure and justice was served" while the SEAL goes on to say "Hey, where's my royalty check?"


Aren't there "proceeds of crime" laws out there?
 
2012-09-05 03:56:26 PM

neversubmit: Will he get the Bradley Manning treatment?


No. There may be civil action, but nobody is talking about criminal charges at this point.
He probably hasn't done anything criminal, strictly speaking.
 
2012-09-05 03:57:01 PM

what_now: Yellow Beard: The author would never see a trial. Can you imagine a jury convicting one of the SEALs that took out Osama? yea, neither can I.

not saying what he did was right, just saying I cannot imagine him getting convicted at a jury trial

A military jury? Comprised of people who signed the exact same agreements that he did? Comprised of people who's life he risks by spilling secrets?

yeah, I can see them convicting him.



You realize that "Mark Owen" is a civilian now, right?

Anything they tried to do legally would go through the federal court system, so he wouldn't have a "military jury."

He spent more than the requisite 8 years in, so it's not like he's on IRR and can be recalled and he didn't have the 20 in to formally retire, so...Safe from being called back there, too.

In short, he's no more answerable to the UCMJ or a military court than the next random guy on the street is.
 
2012-09-05 03:58:11 PM

CygnusDarius: The Southern Logic Company: WTF Indeed: I'll wait for the BDSM fanfic version.

No Easy Shades?

I'll wait for the porn version.

/No Easy Shades for Sasha Grey


I doubt anything about Sasha Grey isn't "Easy"
 
2012-09-05 04:00:52 PM
Why is "Vera Wang" one of the tags for this thread?

/exactly what kind of "insider details" did this guy put in his book?
 
2012-09-05 04:05:50 PM

vernonFL: [991.com image 450x475]

Barbra Streisand was pretty hot back in the day.


Nice legs. The rest? Meh.
 
2012-09-05 04:06:28 PM

bigbadideasinaction: IvanTheSilent: Carth: Yellow Beard: The author would never see a trial. Can you imagine a jury convicting one of the SEALs that took out Osama? yea, neither can I.

not saying what he did was right, just saying I cannot imagine him getting convicted at a jury trial

Do you think they'd try him in civilian court vs a military tribunal?

Nope, recall to active duty to stand on the charges. If found guilty, most likely he'd receive a reduction in rank to E-1, forfeiture of all pay, allowances and benefits, dishonorable discharge or general discharge under other than honorable, and confinement of up to 5 years (suspended.) They wouldn't actually jail him and would likely give him a general discharge citing "abuse of a special position of trust" and "acts or omissions that endanger the security of the United States or the health and welfare of other members of the Military Services." In the end, the Pentagon will be able to say "Hey, we followed procedure and justice was served" while the SEAL goes on to say "Hey, where's my royalty check?"

Aren't there "proceeds of crime" laws out there?


There are, but I'm not sure that the DoD would go after the money too. Honestly, this is too messy a situation. Chief Bissonnette should have kept his mouth shut. It's that plain and simple. Or he should have kicked the manuscript up his chain of command. They would have redacted everything they didn't like (and aparently, there isn't much that they don't like about the book.) If they do take the money, it will likely be reassigned to a support charity, like the Wounded Warrior or something. I simply don't know because I've never heard of a case where a genuine hero screwed up so badly.
 
2012-09-05 04:06:33 PM

Old_Chief_Scott: lunchinlewis: If they ever decide to prosecute, he'll probably just stage his death in the Chesapeake Bay and become a CIA agent.

Mr. Clark has more class than this guy.


I'm not at all surprised you were the first to pick that up.
 
2012-09-05 04:06:37 PM

Karma313th: what_now: Yellow Beard: The author would never see a trial. Can you imagine a jury convicting one of the SEALs that took out Osama? yea, neither can I.

not saying what he did was right, just saying I cannot imagine him getting convicted at a jury trial

A military jury? Comprised of people who signed the exact same agreements that he did? Comprised of people who's life he risks by spilling secrets?

yeah, I can see them convicting him.


You realize that "Mark Owen" is a civilian now, right?

Anything they tried to do legally would go through the federal court system, so he wouldn't have a "military jury."

He spent more than the requisite 8 years in, so it's not like he's on IRR and can be recalled and he didn't have the 20 in to formally retire, so...Safe from being called back there, too.

In short, he's no more answerable to the UCMJ or a military court than the next random guy on the street is.


I think you may have a flaw in your logic. There's active duty, reserve duty, and inactive duty. It's one of the things they emphasize after you enlist - sure, your enlistment only states 2 years of duty pursuant to the needs of the military, but you've actually got 8 total years. 6 of those are inactive and you're subject to involuntary recall if needed.

Additionally, depending on the way the security clearance laws and rules are written, he may still be tried under the UCMJ.

IANAL, just going from memory here.
 
2012-09-05 04:07:35 PM

Lady Beryl Ersatz-Wendigo: /exactly what kind of "insider details" did this guy put in his book?


Depends on what you're looking for by "insider".

He does provide a pretty detailed walk through of events preceding, during and after the raid.

Nothing particularly groundbreaking, other than confirmation the story Obama and the Whitehouse put out was pretty much pure BS. And even the WH had somewhat admitted that not too long after when they admitted that that "not all the details were entirely accurate."

If you're looking for classified facts or tactics, they're really not here. He goes into more detail with selection and training than the Navy's probably comfortable with, and I doubt they're happy with his forthrightness on same aspects of conversations that took place, but otherwise...
 
2012-09-05 04:08:43 PM

Raoul Eaton: Pathman: am i a moran? i don't get the babs reference.

Streisand Effect. An attempt to suppress publication of information results in widespread publicity for the suppressed information. Not really applicable here, because I haven't seen anything about attempts to seize the books or prevent distribution--just possible legal action against the author, which isn't really a Streisand Effect kind of thing. Subby was stretching a bit for a clever headline.
Link


Not to mention it's already #1 on Amazon. How much more publicity could it get?
 
2012-09-05 04:09:47 PM
This guy has gotten himself ostracized from the entire SEAL community. That might be both the only and the worst punishment he gets.
 
2012-09-05 04:10:10 PM

WTF Indeed: I'll wait for the BDSM fanfic version.


They skipped right past that and went straight to the LARP.

/my state is freakin' weird
 
2012-09-05 04:14:26 PM

xmasbaby: This guy has gotten himself ostracized from the entire SEAL community. That might be both the only and the worst punishment he gets.



QFT.

even marcinko has his detractors within the community. funny thing about SEALs, when you break ranks, they tend to get pissed off.


back when this happened, adam carolla had a funny bit about being the guy that iced bin laden, citing the whole secrecy thing. he's like, "can you imagine beign that guy? you can't say anything but it is the biggest story in the world? can you imagine how much pussy you'd get if you were allowed to say you were the guy?"

(it isn't funny the way i'm describing it but aceman was hilraious.)
 
2012-09-05 04:18:42 PM

ronaprhys: Karma313th: what_now: Yellow Beard: The author would never see a trial. Can you imagine a jury convicting one of the SEALs that took out Osama? yea, neither can I.

not saying what he did was right, just saying I cannot imagine him getting convicted at a jury trial

A military jury? Comprised of people who signed the exact same agreements that he did? Comprised of people who's life he risks by spilling secrets?

yeah, I can see them convicting him.


You realize that "Mark Owen" is a civilian now, right?

Anything they tried to do legally would go through the federal court system, so he wouldn't have a "military jury."

He spent more than the requisite 8 years in, so it's not like he's on IRR and can be recalled and he didn't have the 20 in to formally retire, so...Safe from being called back there, too.

In short, he's no more answerable to the UCMJ or a military court than the next random guy on the street is.

I think you may have a flaw in your logic. There's active duty, reserve duty, and inactive duty. It's one of the things they emphasize after you enlist - sure, your enlistment only states 2 years of duty pursuant to the needs of the military, but you've actually got 8 total years. 6 of those are inactive and you're subject to involuntary recall if needed.

Additionally, depending on the way the security clearance laws and rules are written, he may still be tried under the UCMJ.

IANAL, just going from memory here.



I'm aware of the distinction between active, reserve and IRR.

I think you may have misunderstood.

I said "Mark Owen" put in more than 8 years on active duty. Therefore he's fulfilled the obligations of his enlistment contract and isn't subject to serving additional time in IRR status.

Likewise, had he put in 20 years and retired, he would have been subject to recall to active duty for life. However, since he didn't retire and instead was discharged (he was 5 years short, I believe), he doesn't have that hanging over him either.

And no, that he had a clearance at one point in time has nothing to do with subjecting him to the UCMJ. The document in question is the SF312, which I'm very familiar with myself.

Violating the NDA can subject you to severe problems on the criminal and civil front, to be sure. However, once you're "out" out, the UCMJ ain't one of them.
 
2012-09-05 04:18:44 PM
I read the book last night. His foreword makes it clear that pretty much any missions or details he discussed, are either already widely reported in the news, or are public knowledge. He changed names, except for high ranking officials (Admiral McRaven, etc.) who are already well known. I'm not in the Pentagon but I didn't have anything scream out at me that it was still confidential knowledge.

As far as technology, he referred to the bin Laden choppers as Blackhawks, and went into no detail about the suspected stealth technology on board. The only semi-shady thing mentioned in the book was that some CIA planners wanted them to bring a "sixty pound box that blocked cell phone signals"; while I don't think our government officially claims to have this tech, it's pretty much been believed for a while. Based on my general knowledge, and what I read ... I think he's going to be alright.
 
2012-09-05 04:18:51 PM

ronaprhys: Karma313th: what_now: Yellow Beard: The author would never see a trial. Can you imagine a jury convicting one of the SEALs that took out Osama? yea, neither can I.

not saying what he did was right, just saying I cannot imagine him getting convicted at a jury trial

A military jury? Comprised of people who signed the exact same agreements that he did? Comprised of people who's life he risks by spilling secrets?

yeah, I can see them convicting him.


You realize that "Mark Owen" is a civilian now, right?

Anything they tried to do legally would go through the federal court system, so he wouldn't have a "military jury."

He spent more than the requisite 8 years in, so it's not like he's on IRR and can be recalled and he didn't have the 20 in to formally retire, so...Safe from being called back there, too.

In short, he's no more answerable to the UCMJ or a military court than the next random guy on the street is.

I think you may have a flaw in your logic. There's active duty, reserve duty, and inactive duty. It's one of the things they emphasize after you enlist - sure, your enlistment only states 2 years of duty pursuant to the needs of the military, but you've actually got 8 total years. 6 of those are inactive and you're subject to involuntary recall if needed.

Additionally, depending on the way the security clearance laws and rules are written, he may still be tried under the UCMJ.

IANAL, just going from memory here.


This is exactly right. Regardless of the reason for your separation from service (eg, contract is up, retirement, medical discharge,) you are obligated to at least two years in the Individual Ready Reserve unless your separation states otherwise (eg, a dishonorable discharge after a period of confinement would preclude you from IRR status.) If you are a retiree, and eligible for retirement benefits (as Chief Bissonnette is,) then your tail is eligible for recall at any time until the day you freakin' die, unless you want to give up that pension. Normally, however, they will not call you back after your IRR period (again, 2 years, up to 6 years) unless there's good reason (For example, MSG Roy Benavidez was recalled to active duty for 1 day in 1981, so President Reagan could present him with the Medal of Honor.)

As I said before, though, Bissonnette screwed up, but this has the potential to be a lot more embarassing to the Navy. They'll have some sort of show trial, the Chief will get a slap on the wrist, and everyone goes away happy.
 
2012-09-05 04:20:27 PM

Weaver95: As I recall, the Pentagon takes this sort of thing very seriously. you sign a stack of paperwork when you get your clearance...and one of the things you sign lays it out in great detail: if you write a book or an article for newspapers and the like...you clear it first. if you don't clear it with the Powers That Be, then you risk jail time.


Sure, but as long as you are cool with persecuting a SEAL for doing essentially the same thing that the White House did within hours of the raid. Also you should be cool with persecuting a man who is by all rights a national hero.,...persecuting him mostly because he disagreed with the President and made Obama look bad. The White House has been shown to have been shopping the story for a Movie, Leaked information which got one of our assets in Pakistan sent to a prison camp, and has been pushing the credit for the raid as close to the President as they can without photoshopping him into a picture of the SEALs shooting Bin Laden.

But as long as we are being all hard-ass and enforcing the law against a national hero for something he said in a book......

Lets apply the same Logic to old Barry.

In his memoir Obama admits to actions which constitute felony possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute, distribution to minors, and a whole host of individual possession felonies. Sounds like by your logic we need to have Obama Arrested so he can be arraigned and charged so he can clear his good name by admitting that everything he ever wrote in his memoir was a fabrication.
 
2012-09-05 04:22:22 PM
If any actual secrets were revealed in the book it would never have made it as far as being shipped.

Link
 
2012-09-05 04:24:14 PM

Yellow Beard: The author would never see a trial. Can you imagine a jury convicting one of the SEALs that took out Osama? yea, neither can I.

not saying what he did was right, just saying I cannot imagine him getting convicted at a jury trial



Wouldn't it be a court-marshal?
 
2012-09-05 04:25:12 PM

IvanTheSilent:

This is exactly right. Regardless of the reason for your separation from service (eg, contract is up, retirement, medical discharge,) you are obligated to at least two years in the Individual Ready Reserve unless your separation states otherwise (eg, a dishonorable discharge after a period of confinement would preclude you from IRR status.) If you are a retiree, and eligible for retirement benefits (as Chief Bissonnette is,) then your tail is eligible for recall at any time until the day you freakin' die, unless you want to give up t ...


Bissonnette DIDN'T retire.

He didn't have the time in to be eligible to put in his papers. Bissonnette had 14 years of service at the time of his discharge.

I think the confusion is the press is throwing around "retired" without realizing it has a very specific meaning in the military.
 
2012-09-05 04:30:16 PM

HotWingConspiracy: Science_Guy_3.14159: The only way I can see him getting out of this is if he gets HUGE public support, the DoD doesn't want to look like the bad guy to a bunch of people. I don't see that happening though.

Huge public support would make the need to smack him down more urgent.


I am just thinking what happened with Daniel Ellsberg when he leaked the Pentagon Papers, although he had the press, the public and members of congress backing him. Also the Supreme Court ruling in the US vs New York Times probably helped him.
 
2012-09-05 04:34:28 PM

strangeguitar: Babs knows what she is talking about when it comes to the DoD.

She is sometimes their secret weapon


But the DoD has a secret weapon against Babs

philosophychild.files.wordpress.com

upload.wikimedia.org

NEIL DIAMOND!!!
 
2012-09-05 04:34:30 PM

Weaver95: As I recall, the Pentagon takes this sort of thing very seriously. you sign a stack of paperwork when you get your clearance...and one of the things you sign lays it out in great detail: if you write a book or an article for newspapers and the like...you clear it first. if you don't clear it with the Powers That Be, then you risk jail time.


Yes! It's only a single two-page form, but it's REALLY REALLY IMPORTANT! As soon as you're issued your initial clearance (regardless of access level), you're required to sign a non-disclosure agreement. No form means no clearance. Form is only two pages long, but it follows you everywhere. It stays on file with your facility security office for SIXTY YEARS from the date you signed and dated it.

The form isn't particularly exotic. In fact you can find it online right here and lots of other places. US Gov't SF-312 non-disclosure agreement pdf
 
2012-09-05 04:36:29 PM

lunchinlewis: Old_Chief_Scott: lunchinlewis: If they ever decide to prosecute, he'll probably just stage his death in the Chesapeake Bay and become a CIA agent.

Mr. Clark has more class than this guy.

I'm not at all surprised you were the first to pick that up.


Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
 
2012-09-05 04:38:48 PM

Gecko Gingrich: Wouldn't it be a court-marshal?


*martial


/Id'jut
 
2012-09-05 04:39:14 PM

Karma313th: IvanTheSilent:

This is exactly right. Regardless of the reason for your separation from service (eg, contract is up, retirement, medical discharge,) you are obligated to at least two years in the Individual Ready Reserve unless your separation states otherwise (eg, a dishonorable discharge after a period of confinement would preclude you from IRR status.) If you are a retiree, and eligible for retirement benefits (as Chief Bissonnette is,) then your tail is eligible for recall at any time until the day you freakin' die, unless you want to give up t ...

Bissonnette DIDN'T retire.

He didn't have the time in to be eligible to put in his papers. Bissonnette had 14 years of service at the time of his discharge.

I think the confusion is the press is throwing around "retired" without realizing it has a very specific meaning in the military.


Everything I've seen has said "retired." I'm rather sure, even with as stupid as the press is, they'd know the difference between someone who was discharged and someone who retired. Plus, I find it hard to believe that someone'd make Chief in 14 years. I know that it's possible to do so in 12 if you hit every single bullet point on the way up, right on time. Being he was a SEAL, I wouldn't doubt he could do it too. But unless something is vastly different in the Navy from the Air Force that step that comes from E-6 to E-7 also gets you a 3 year extension on your contract. It could be that he was discharged early, but I'd wonder why if that were the case. In the end, regardless of any other detail or fact, I stand by my comment that Chief Bissonnette should have kept his damn mouth shut.
 
2012-09-05 04:40:29 PM

archichris: ...persecuting him mostly because he disagreed with the President and made Obama look bad....



Explain please. I'm really curious. With facts other than "ZOMG he actually waited!!"

Sure, Obamas Top advisers didn't want to PO Pakistan (which seems pretty rational considering the international stink this would have created). I mean after all...why have another Jimmy Carter accident? And on a side note...its not like we actually should have BEEN in Pakistan in the first place--que a major international incident.

Personally, I prefer someone who actually listens to advise, rather than some "lets git er" yahoo---but what do I know?

Oh and by the way. It worked (early or not)

/we get it...he's blah
 
2012-09-05 04:44:10 PM
Bissonnette would do best to prepare for his eventual loss in court because there's precedence the government can fall back on.
 
2012-09-05 04:44:48 PM
Link

Is greatly amused. And advises the nubi to not drop the soap.
 
2012-09-05 04:44:52 PM

Science_Guy_3.14159: The only way I can see him getting out of this is if he gets HUGE public support, the DoD doesn't want to look like the bad guy to a bunch of people. I don't see that happening though.


On the other hand, the DOD could decide to make an example of him. You know, to prevent other military people from doing the same.

My vote would be make and example out of him.
 
2012-09-05 04:45:06 PM
I said it in the last thread and I'll say it here, having read the book, I just don't get what all the fuss is about. There didn't seem to be anything particularly revealing in it. The accounts on training and the day to day stuff were cool but not much different than what you read in any military fiction book (Tom Clancy, etc.)

So I learned guys with night vision googles use IR chem lights. I doubt thats a state secret, I just never thought about it.

I suppose the Navy might not like some of the stories about SEALs giving each other the finger and sticking a black dildo in a barrel of animal crackers (you have to read it) but its not like these details are compromising.

Should he have submitted it? Probably but I doubt there's much there the powers that be would really have redacted. But boy it's great publicity isn't it?
 
2012-09-05 04:46:29 PM
Dammit!



Is greatly amused. And advises the nubi to not drop the soap.
 
2012-09-05 04:47:06 PM

netizencain: Of course he'd be a hero to everyone if it was released to Wikileaks.


Releasing it to Wikileaks would not be for profit and would mean he did it because he thought the story had to be told.

What we have in THIS case is a jerk who decided his word and his signature mean nothing if he can profit by violating agreements he has entered in to. I hope the DOD locks him up and throws away the key, or at least sues him until it is a net lo$$.
 
2012-09-05 04:47:06 PM
Oh FFS! nevermind.
 
2012-09-05 04:50:20 PM

trackstr777: The only semi-shady thing mentioned in the book was that some CIA planners wanted them to bring a "sixty pound box that blocked cell phone signals"; while I don't think our government officially claims to have this tech, it's pretty much been believed for a while.


A sixty pound box?? They should invest in some Taiwanese technology.
 
2012-09-05 04:51:55 PM
You have to admire the sheer hypocrisy of the liberals in this matter. Bradley Manning is a hero to them but the SEAL is a traitor. They are just pissed because they actually thought Obama would get a free pass to say he was responsible for taking out OBL.
 
Displayed 50 of 171 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report