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.

(Fox News)   Congressman notes that five jihadists have reached their targets under Obama, quickly glosses over the fact he still 14 points behind Bush   (nation.foxnews.com) divider line 128
    More: Dumbass, Fourteen Points, United States, underwear bomber, Times Square bomber, congressman, jihadists  
•       •       •

1854 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Apr 2013 at 10:43 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-25 01:15:59 PM
"... reached their targets" and were often apprehended before they were able to harm anyone.
 
2013-04-25 01:17:50 PM

Pants full of macaroni!!: Epoch_Zero: Check this out:

In other words, LIBERALS = ANYONE WHO'S NOT ONE OF US.


That, and the GOP is using tried and true jingoism in the styling of the most evil and bloodthirsty groups in modern history :D
 
2013-04-25 01:20:14 PM
wingnut396:Know a guy that blames the current situation on Clinton's handling of Mogadishu because since we didn't respond to the dragging of the body of the pilot around with carpet bombing, it showed the world we were a paper tiger.  He doesn't have much of response beyond a glare when I ask how our response to the Islamic Jihad bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon didn't do the same thing.

Next time you see him, be sure to ask why over a decade of warfare hasn't proven enough of a deterrent.

Hint: he'll probably answer with the congressman's screed - that it did under Dubya, but as soon as Obama showed what a pansy he was the terrorists became emboldened again.  So be sure to have the lists of terrorist acts committed under Bush listed previously in the thread handy.
 
2013-04-25 01:27:51 PM

Epoch_Zero: Satanic_Hamster: All they know is that liberals bad, bad things mean it was liberals fault, and that it makes them feel better to bullshiat about how bad things are and how it's all liberals fault and that anyone questioning/correcting them is a LIBERAL.

Um..Check this out:

All they know is that  liberals Communists bad, bad things mean it was  liberals Communists fault, and that it makes them feel better to bullshiat about how bad things are and how it's all  liberals Communists fault and that anyone questioning/correcting them is a  LIBERAL COMMUNIST.

All they know is that liberals Jews bad, bad things mean it was liberals Jews fault, and that it makes them feel better to bullshiat about how bad things are and how it's all  liberals Jews' fault and that anyone questioning/correcting them is a  LIBERAL JEW.

All they know is that liberals Ni****s bad, bad things mean it was liberals Ni****s fault, and that it makes them feel better to bullshiat about how bad things are and how it's all liberals Ni****s fault and that anyone questioning/correcting them is a LIBERAL NI****.

All they know is that liberals Irish bad, bad things mean it was liberals Irish fault, and that it makes them feel better to bullshiat about how bad things are and how it's all  liberals Irish' fault and that anyone questioning/correcting them is a  LIBERAL IRISHMAN.

All they know is that liberals Gaijin bad, bad things mean it was liberals Gaijins' fault, and that it makes them feel better to bullshiat about how bad things are and how it's all  liberals Gaijins' fault and that anyone questioning/correcting them is a  LIBERAL GAIJIN.

[encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com image 259x194]

They're just people who love liberty....


They love guns, not liberty... these are people who want the FBI to wiretap places of worship of religions they don't like, who want no due process for people of religions they don't care for, who think the government should regulate which sacraments you can take part in, and who believe in "you get what you can pay for" in terms of childhood education and food for needy kids. They hate the constitution, they hate freedom, what they want is tyranny... they just want to be the tyrants.
 
2013-04-25 01:29:08 PM

jntaylor63: .

3 - Lastly, are you REALLY going to compare 9/11 to Boston?  Did Obama get 5 warnings that Boston was going to happen and still sat on his ass.

.


Boston news affiliate this morning (ABC or NBC) was reporting that Russian Intel had warned the FBI that the bomber had been radicalized. and later asked the CIA to investigate his overseas activity because they were concerned he was a threat.

If this is true, then our intelligence community would have had two warnings about this guy.  Does that count as a warning to President Obama?  What is the level of the 5 Warnings Bush had but sat on his ass?  Were they to his face, or to an agency he controls?
 
2013-04-25 01:30:15 PM

firefly212: They love guns, not liberty... these are people who want the FBI to wiretap places of worship of religions they don't like, who want no due process for people of religions they don't care for, who think the government should regulate which sacraments you can take part in, and who believe in "you get what you can pay for" in terms of childhood education and food for needy kids. They hate the constitution, they hate freedom, what they want is tyranny... they just want to be the tyrants.


Republicans hate us for our freedoms.
 
2013-04-25 01:32:01 PM

Tricky Chicken: jntaylor63: .

3 - Lastly, are you REALLY going to compare 9/11 to Boston?  Did Obama get 5 warnings that Boston was going to happen and still sat on his ass.

.

Boston news affiliate this morning (ABC or NBC) was reporting that Russian Intel had warned the FBI that the bomber had been radicalized. and later asked the CIA to investigate his overseas activity because they were concerned he was a threat.

If this is true, then our intelligence community would have had two warnings about this guy.  Does that count as a warning to President Obama?  What is the level of the 5 Warnings Bush had but sat on his ass?  Were they to his face, or to an agency he controls?


To be clear about the "conservative" position on due process, they don't care if you get thrown in prison without a trial, shipped off to guantanamo, or tortured by our government, so long as your second amendment right to purchase more guns is protected until you get the fair trial that is never gonna come.
 
2013-04-25 01:35:26 PM

Satanic_Hamster: firefly212: They love guns, not liberty... these are people who want the FBI to wiretap places of worship of religions they don't like, who want no due process for people of religions they don't care for, who think the government should regulate which sacraments you can take part in, and who believe in "you get what you can pay for" in terms of childhood education and food for needy kids. They hate the constitution, they hate freedom, what they want is tyranny... they just want to be the tyrants.

Republicans hate us for our freedoms.


T-shirt/Bumper sticker. Now.
 
2013-04-25 01:36:28 PM
Lets ask Osama Bin Laden and Muammar al-Gaddafi what they think about that.

There will be a lot of sandy vags in butt hurt sauce over the fact that President Obama got the guys that they couldnt, and stole thier "National Security" crown.

All the things that Republicans have run on in the past as their strengths have now become their weaknesses.
 
2013-04-25 01:52:17 PM

Citrate1007: freshman congressman from Arkansas

Strike 1 and 2 your Tea Tarded Twat


Actually this guy was warned a few weeks ago that he'd better start derping it up or he was going to get a primary challenger.  Mission Accomplished.
 
2013-04-25 01:55:11 PM
0.tqn.com
 
2013-04-25 02:01:20 PM

firefly212: Tricky Chicken: jntaylor63: .

3 - Lastly, are you REALLY going to compare 9/11 to Boston?  Did Obama get 5 warnings that Boston was going to happen and still sat on his ass.

.

Boston news affiliate this morning (ABC or NBC) was reporting that Russian Intel had warned the FBI that the bomber had been radicalized. and later asked the CIA to investigate his overseas activity because they were concerned he was a threat.

If this is true, then our intelligence community would have had two warnings about this guy.  Does that count as a warning to President Obama?  What is the level of the 5 Warnings Bush had but sat on his ass?  Were they to his face, or to an agency he controls?

To be clear about the "conservative" position on due process, they don't care if you get thrown in prison without a trial, shipped off to guantanamo, or tortured by our government, so long as your second amendment right to purchase more guns is protected until you get the fair trial that is never gonna come.


Clearly you intended to respond to a different post.

If not, I will remind you that the VW beetle of the 1970s did not have a radiator.
 
2013-04-25 03:27:32 PM

hugram: tenpoundsofcheese: FlashHarry: do these assholes seriously think that we'll forget about 9/11?

Do you think that Bush is still President?

The point is how is the current President doing.  But okay, 0bama is only the second worse President.

And yet you voted for Bush... Twice.


Wow, you're assuming he was old enough to vote then. You give him far more credit than I do.
 
2013-04-25 03:37:45 PM

Sgt Otter: Not when a Republican is president.


Mass shootings are all at once.  He was a serial killer.
 
2013-04-25 04:53:58 PM

vernonFL: the underwear bomber, the Times Square Bomber,

What did they blow up?


Nothing...but they REACHED something they could have blown up!!!

What I want to know is why Obama was responsible for "stopping" the Tsarnaev brothers, since they "reached" their target when they arrived here from Russia. In 2001. Wouldn't that mean Bush didn't stop them?
 
2013-04-25 06:00:11 PM

Sorry, libtards. I just found new and irrefutable evidence that Fartbongo supports terrorism. Study it out!


i28.photobucket.com

 
2013-04-25 06:21:18 PM

Gyrfalcon: vernonFL: the underwear bomber, the Times Square Bomber,

What did they blow up?

Nothing...but they REACHED something they could have blown up!!!

What I want to know is why Obama was responsible for "stopping" the Tsarnaev brothers, since they "reached" their target when they arrived here from Russia. In 2001. Wouldn't that mean Bush didn't stop them?


Terrorists failing a mission is just pure blind luck. You cannot dismiss them as irrelevant simply because they screwed up and got caught after the fact. I personally don't "blame Obama" for terrorists getting lucky anymore than I blamed Bush for it, but since liberals would jump and down screaming like children over absolutely everything and it was ALWAYS Bush's fault then I'm going to have to ask them to apply their own damn standard to their guy now that they've got the White House.

Besides, the point they're making is that we entered a heightened state of awareness after 9/11. Pulling off a terrorist attack in this new environment is harder.

9/11 was completely unprecedented. Nobody in America, left, right or center, had terrorism on their mind in the months leading up to 9/11. I mean sure, it made a bit on the news now and then, but it was not at the forefront of peoples minds. Use the internet cache of your choice but Wayback machine... CNN, MSNBC, Fox... Do you see terrorism anywhere on those sites from July/Aug 2001?

"But... but... security memos! Bush's fault!"

Let go of the hate and stupidity and you will understand more clearly that nobody in our government let's these things happen and we're always trying hard to stop it.
 
2013-04-25 07:58:14 PM

randomjsa: Gyrfalcon: vernonFL: the underwear bomber, the Times Square Bomber,

What did they blow up?

Nothing...but they REACHED something they could have blown up!!!

What I want to know is why Obama was responsible for "stopping" the Tsarnaev brothers, since they "reached" their target when they arrived here from Russia. In 2001. Wouldn't that mean Bush didn't stop them?

Terrorists failing a mission is just pure blind luck. You cannot dismiss them as irrelevant simply because they screwed up and got caught after the fact. I personally don't "blame Obama" for terrorists getting lucky anymore than I blamed Bush for it, but since liberals would jump and down screaming like children over absolutely everything and it was ALWAYS Bush's fault then I'm going to have to ask them to apply their own damn standard to their guy now that they've got the White House.

Besides, the point they're making is that we entered a heightened state of awareness after 9/11. Pulling off a terrorist attack in this new environment is harder.

9/11 was completely unprecedented. Nobody in America, left, right or center, had terrorism on their mind in the months leading up to 9/11. I mean sure, it made a bit on the news now and then, but it was not at the forefront of peoples minds. Use the internet cache of your choice but Wayback machine... CNN, MSNBC, Fox... Do you see terrorism anywhere on those sites from July/Aug 2001?

"But... but... security memos! Bush's fault!"

Let go of the hate and stupidity and you will understand more clearly that nobody in our government let's these things happen and we're always trying hard to stop it.


It's too bad you have to reach this state of satori NOW, and after such an awful event, and not ten years ago when it was so clearly evident that jumping into Iraq would not do jack shiat to stop terrorism.
 
2013-04-25 08:12:01 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: we weren't at war with the terrorists before 9/11.
(well, they were fighting us, but after they bombed the WTC the first time, the President at the time thought it was not worth doing much about).


Again, you are either lying or completely farking ignorant.

There were seven men involved in the conspiracy.  Four of them were caught nearly right-away, another one was captured in Pakistan a years or so later by the FBI.  Of those five, they were convicted and currently spending their time in Federal Max Security Prison where they will remain for life.

One was deported to Jordan to stand trial, where he was acquitted by died a few years later.  The one remaining suspect (the ONLY conspirator NOT captured by US authorities) turned out to being held prisoner in Iraq, where he had been since 1994, a few months after the WTC bombing.  (He was interviewed by 60 Minutes in 2002 still in prison, but was never heard from again as he was not in the prison when the Occupational forces seized the place later.)

So how the hell do you deduce that Clinton: "Thought it was not worth doing much about"?  The perps were caught, and convicted and you are an idiot!
 
2013-04-25 09:28:22 PM

lawboy87: Again, you are either lying or completely farking ignorant.

There were seven men involved in the conspiracy. Four of them were caught nearly right-away, another one was captured in Pakistan a years or so later by the FBI. Of those five, they were convicted and currently spending their time in Federal Max Security Prison where they will remain for life.

One was deported to Jordan to stand trial, where he was acquitted by died a few years later. The one remaining suspect (the ONLY conspirator NOT captured by US authorities) turned out to being held prisoner in Iraq, where he had been since 1994, a few months after the WTC bombing. (He was interviewed by 60 Minutes in 2002 still in prison, but was never heard from again as he was not in the prison when the Occupational forces seized the place later.)

So how the hell do you deduce that Clinton: "Thought it was not worth doing much about"? The perps were caught, and convicted and you are an idiot!


He didn't invade random countries, there for he did NOTHING.
 
2013-04-25 10:39:35 PM

Satanic_Hamster: hugram: Oh, I don't know... maybe the hate you have derped for years about Democratic candidates (both presidential and congress level) might be a hint to me that you have not voted for the Democratic choice in 2000 and 2004. But if you did not vote for Bush in 2000 and in 2004 (assuming you voted for the Democratic option), then why all of the sudden the hatred you have towards the current Democratic president?

He's black?


Blacker than sin. Blue gums even.
 
2013-04-26 12:48:52 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: we weren't at war with the terrorists before 9/11.
(well, they were fighting us, but after they bombed the WTC the first time, the President at the time thought it was not worth doing much about).

or did subby miss that?

oh, and when the guy killed those people at Fort Hood it was just a little bit of "workplace violence"


Just like every time a right-wing fanatic kills someone, he is instantly labeled insane and his politics no longer matter.

Just like how every gun owner is responsible...

until they aren't.  Then they were never a responsible gun owner, but instead they were mentally ill and shouldn't have been allowed to own a gun at all.

Republican logic. A real-life game of dodge ball.
 
2013-04-26 03:21:10 AM
The underwear bomber and the Times Square bomber were successful? Really? As I recall, neither one of them succeeded. "Reaching your target" with something like this, means actually carrying out the attack successfully, not just arriving at your destination. What a moron. 15 people "reached their target" on 9/11(Since 4 died when the lane crashed short of its target), so Obama definitely has a long way to go.

Besides, when did these two guys officially become "jihadists"?
 
2013-04-26 03:25:33 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: we weren't at war with the terrorists before 9/11.
(well, they were fighting us, but after they bombed the WTC the first time, the President at the time thought it was not worth doing much about).

or did subby miss that?

oh, and when the guy killed those people at Fort Hood it was just a little bit of "workplace violence"


Yeah, the "President at the time" of the first WTC attack actually had people behind bars.

Unlike the guy after him who called OBL "irrelevant" after starting two wars under the pretense of fighting a "War on Terror" and OBL being enemy #1.

Remember that? Of course you do, but none of us expect you to actually ADMIT to that. Bush is the one who was unconcerned with terrorism. He was too busy trying to sell us on a missile defense system, and ignored early warnings on OBL. And after his wars got rolling, he ignored OBL as well. Are you sure that's the guy you want to lay your bets on? Seems pretty incompetent to anyone who has two brain cells to rub together...
 
2013-04-26 03:30:37 AM

JusticeandIndependence: FlashHarry: do these assholes seriously think that we'll forget about 9/11?

"I rise today to express grave doubts about the Obama Administration's counterterrorism policies and programs," said the freshman congressman from Arkansas. "Counterterrorism is often shrouded in secrecy, as it should be, so let us judge by the results. In barely four years in office, five jihadists have reached their targets in the United States under Barack Obama: the Boston Marathon bomber, the underwear bomber, the Times Square Bomber, the Fort Hood shooter, and in my own state-the Little Rock recruiting office shooter. In the over seven years after 9/11 under George W. Bush, how many terrorists reached their target in the United States? Zero! We need to ask, 'Why is the Obama Administration failing in its mission to stop terrorism before it reaches its targets in the United States?'"


So the underwear bomber counts, but not the shoe bomber?

Here's what I'd like to know:
Benghazi is considered an act of terrorism.
People captured in Iraq and Afghanistan are not considered enemy soldiers, but "enemy combatants" and "terrorists".

If they're terrorists, then wouldn't all of the attacks and bombings in Iraq and Afghanistan be acts of terror, and not the result of war?

With Benghazi being an act of terror, that leaves it open for foreign attacks to count, and with fighters in Iraq and Afghanistan being considered terrorists, that leaves those attacks open. If so, then how many attacks and deaths under Bush AFTER 9/11?
 
2013-04-26 07:10:38 AM

jntaylor63: 3 - Lastly, are you REALLY going to compare 9/11 to Boston?  Did Obama get 5 warnings that Boston was going to happen and still sat on his ass.


Early reports are that Tamerlan was all over various agency watchlists and was denied a citizenship application on account of being a terror threat.

So there's that.
 
2013-04-26 11:37:32 AM

JusticeandIndependence: tenpoundsofcheese: we weren't at war with the terrorists before 9/11.
(well, they were fighting us, but after they bombed the WTC the first time, the President at the time thought it was not worth doing much about).

or did subby miss that?

oh, and when the guy killed those people at Fort Hood it was just a little bit of "workplace violence"

You didn't read the article did you?


Why start now?
 
2013-04-26 01:24:59 PM

Pincy: It's funny how they always seem to start their counting the day after 9/11.


The levee systems in New Orleans worked after Katrina.
 
Displayed 28 of 128 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report