The warnings don't seem anywhere near that concrete.
The warnings don't seem anywhere near that concrete.
Trees don't grow on money
Well the Guatamala thing is supposedly drug war related.You have to know that 'involvement' could mean 5 advisers, or a few more marines to guard an embassy, which isn't a bad thing.
If it's all too complex for one to possibly ever conceivably understand, why should I make any assumption whatsoever about motives or who the good guys and bad guys even are (if such a thing can even be said to exist). As an inhabitant of an empire, I am told my empire is always benevolent, but of course it's only natural an inhabitant of an empire would be told such. There's plenty of knowledgable people trying to influence power, but who hasn't seen how insular such knowledge can get reverberating around the halls of DC.World politics is a very tangled, and difficult place to be, and the incredible nuance needed to navigate this is pretty incomprehensible to most of us. I am a pretty smart person, but i realize i am not smart enough to navigate this.
Ok that's it, I'm voting for Bill Clinton! Not really a Clinton fan, but in terms of natural curiosity it seems to me Clinton was this to a far greater degree than Obama.Please, when you vote this fall, think beyond the bumper stickers. Think about the natural curiosity, the nuance, and the ability of the candidate.
Well maybe you can have 1 or maybe if you are very lucky 2 of 3:The president is more than 'Will he give me a tax break" . In this age, the President has to be a leader of the World. And not a 'knee jerk leader' but a real leader
1) a european style welfare state
2) low taxes
3) an empire
And in order of priority, like most citizens I'd probably be better off living under #1 or if I can't have #1 then #2 (libertopia). But we only ever get #3 on the menu.
It's mostly just really depressing, wars that never end, are escalating even more.
Last edited by ApatheticNoMore; 9-13-12 at 10:49pm.
Trees don't grow on money
Pretty weak 'evidence' Allen. Did you actually read the article you linked to, or are you just hoping no one will actually click on it and read it, cause all it really says is, we were warned of unrest....well, duh! There was no specific warning that on this day at this time, yada yada. Well here's a warning for you, and I don't even need to 'attend' a briefing. ALL of our embassies in sensitive countries are AT RISK! All the time! Is this news to you? It's not news to most people, especially EMMBASSY STAFF!Originally Posted by Alan
So where, in this supposedly 'damning' article does it say that President Obama failed to attend some meeting? Or are you just channeling Rush Beck?
I'll tell you one thing all this tells me. It tells me how easily religious fundamentalist are manipulated and spun up to use as pawns for political gain. Kind of how Fox Nation spins up the low information folks, where you probably got this link.
Sorry, you don't even get an A for effort cause, you know, anyone who actually reads this article can see for themselves.
Actually, Hilliary Clinton gave a very goo speech on this.
http://news.yahoo.com/secretary-clin...-politics.html
"In her remarks, Clinton repeated much of what she's said in the last two days. Namely that the Benghazi attack was carried out by a "small and savage group," and that the United States completely rejects what she called the "inflammable and despicable" anti-Muslim film circulating the Internet. However, Clinton pointed out all religions have faced insults and denigration, but that's no justification for violence. The response to such insults is what separates people of true faith from those who would use religion as an excuse to commit violent acts, she said."
"... But she also highlighted the outpouring of support the United States has received from the Muslim world. She thanked the Libyan Ambassador, Ali Suleiman Aujali, who gave a heartfelt tribute U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens ,whom he called his dear friend, killed in Benghazi on Tuesday.
"I must tell you, Madam Secretary, and tell the American people, that Chris is a hero," said Aujali. "He loves Benghazi, he loves the people, he talks to them, he eats with them, and he [was] committed - and unfortunately lost his life because of this commitment."
I read the article. There was no reference to Obama or his missing his security updates. Another case of shooting before aiming.
The recent issue of Vanity Fair has a good article (available online) about Obama and what his daily routine is like. Interestingly it is about his decisions on leading NATO to support the Libyans. I don't think he idles away much time bass fishing in Texas.
LOL, I thought several folks here would appreciate that 'weak' evidence since similarly 'weak' evidence has been mentioned on these forums many times in the past and again in just the past few days as a means to imply that the Bush administration was lax in securing America on 9/11. It's sometimes hard to resist that goose/gander thing.
Sorry about using two examples in one sentence. I simply assumed that a 'high information voter' such as yourself kept up with political news, especially those items that have been around for a while. Here ya go: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...4e1_story.htmlSo where, in this supposedly 'damning' article does it say that President Obama failed to attend some meeting? Or are you just channeling Rush Beck?
Thanks again for your inappropriate display of condecension. It makes it easy to see where you're coming from.I'll tell you one thing all this tells me. It tells me how easily religious fundamentalist are manipulated and spun up to use as pawns for political gain. Kind of how Fox Nation spins up the low information folks, where you probably got this link.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
Speaking of 'shooting before aiming', please see my response to Peggy on this subject. Or, simply Google 'Obama Security Updates'. The subject has been much discussed and written about over the past week so you'll find plenty of supporting commentary.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
All this tells me is Obama is a reader, and George wasn't. Which is okay, we all get our information in different wasy. And it doesn't say he missed this particular meeting, or that he didn't read the briefing for it.
I love straw men. They are so easy to knock down.
"There are too many books in the world to read in a single lifetime; you have to draw the line somewhere." --Diane Setterfield, The Thirteenth Tale
Of course, it could also tell you that the opportunity to not only be presented with relevant information, but to also question the details might be helpful to its intended audience. I guess it just depends on who it's being presented to.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
Ok, so we wasted our time entirely by clicking on the link, because it was really just some elaborate game playing. Here we were trying to read it at a rational adult level and it was meant purely at a childish level "but teacher, Johnny does it too!". Thanks, I feel um ... played? I read the article with the W scenario in mind and found it equally weak (what W could have done is empower those under him, but what you can't do is lock down an entire country of this population and size, heaven knows after 9-11 they have tried and I *despise* that and even so it's mostly security theater, how effective it is is highly doubtful, my choice is risk and civil liberties). So really folks you'd be better off reading my *commentary* link about Guatamala (which I didn't expect anyone to necessarily read, and which is openly biased (anti-interventionist left) - it's um commentary, but even then more useful information than trying to parse through that link that Alan gave).LOL, I thought several folks here would appreciate that 'weak' evidence since similarly 'weak' evidence has been mentioned on these forums many times in the past and again in just the past few days as a means to imply that the Bush administration was lax in securing America on 9/11. It's sometimes hard to resist that goose/gander thing.
Last edited by ApatheticNoMore; 9-14-12 at 12:07pm.
Trees don't grow on money
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote