One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Paul Andy
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
May 9, 2014 12:19:57   #
skott wrote:
You and I can just disagree on what "destroying America" is. Reagan may have been the best man for the job at the time, but if Obama did what Reagan did, that I mentioned before in this thread, Republicans would be calling for his execution. After 4 deaths when we were attacked by terrorists in B******i, look at how you h**e Obama. But after 300 deaths in Beirut, you love Reagan. How completely biased and sad.

Aw cut the CRAP! Tell you what: We conservatives will stop telling the t***h about you statist liberals, just as soon as you stop LYING about US! Don't like it? SUE ME! :twisted:
Go to
May 9, 2014 08:42:24   #
MrEd wrote:
But why wouldn't you find hungry people here in this country. Just because we are the worlds food bank does not mean we feed our own people first. Why that would be sacrileges to even think such a thing could happen. Why would we give it to our own people instead of giving it to third world countries so the warlords can steal it and hold it over the heads of the low life population and make them dependent on them for food. We donate it to a country, the warlords steal it and they make a fortune while we sit here telling ourselves how great a job we did. Feeding all our hungry people will not make those warlords love us and we really do need to control our population better you know. After all, the hungry do nothing but breed and make more hungry people. We can't have that..................
But why wouldn't you find hungry people here in th... (show quote)

Slightly twisted in it's presentation (Which I LOVE! I see your'e a wiseacre too!), but a good point! Thanks!
Go to
May 9, 2014 08:38:37   #
Patty wrote:
First take their means of support and savings.
http://fdic.gov/about/srac/2012/gsifi.pdf

Then make everything illegal.
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=mcsaoffblock&type=A001US685&p=New laws Obama

Have your civilian labor camps set up.
http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/r210_35.pdf

"Civilian Inmate
Labor Program

History. This publication is a rapid action
r e v i s i o n . T h e p o r t i o n s a f f e c t e d b y t h i s
r a p i d a c t i o n r e v i s i o n a r e l i s t e d i n t h e
summary of change.
S u m m a r y . T h i s r e g u l a t i o n p r o v i d e s
guidance for establishing and managing
civilian inmate labor programs on Army
installations. It provides guidance on establishing
prison camps on Army installat
i o n s . I t a d d r e s s e s r e c o r d k e e p i n g a n d
reporting incidents related to the Civilian
Inmate Labor Program and/or prison camp
administration.
Applicability. This regulation applies to
t h e A c t i v e A r m y , t h e A r m y N a t i o n a l
Guard of the United States, and the U.S.
A r m y R e s e r v e u n l e s s o t h e r w i s e s t a t e d .
During mobilization, the Assistant Chief
of Staff for Installation Management may
modify chapters and policies contained in
this regulation.
Proponent and exception authority.
The proponent of this regulation is the
Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation
Management. The proponent has the authority
to approve exceptions or waivers
to this regulation that are consistent with
controlling law and regulations. The proponent
may delegate this approval authority,
in writing, to a division chief within
the proponent agency or a direct reporting
unit or field operating agency of the proponent
agency in the grade of colonel or
the civilian equivalent. Activities may request
a waiver to this regulation by prov
i d i n g j u s t i f i c a t i o n t h a t i n c l u d e s a f u l l
analysis of the expected benefits and must
i n c l u d e f o r m a l r e v i e w b y t h e a c t i v i t y ’ s
senior legal officer. All waiver requests
will be endorsed by the commander or
s e n i o r l e a d e r o f t h e r e q u e s t i n g a c t i v i t y
and forwarded through their higher headquarters
to the policy proponent. Refer to
AR 25–30 for specific guidance.
Army management control process.
First take their means of support and savings. br ... (show quote)

Kind of makes the blood run a little cold, does-n't it? "But I know Whom I have believed, and am persuaded that He is able to to keep that which I've committed unto Him against that day!" Were it NOT for this, I should be on the verge of panic by now!
Go to
May 9, 2014 08:29:10   #
RETW wrote:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/08/clinton-state-department-resisted-labeling-boko-haram-as-terror-group/

If you can't protect the United States When your the Secretary of State, What makes anyone want her as the president? A v**e for her, is a special kind of stupid.


True, a v**e for Hillary really IS "a special kind of stupid!" Oh but I HOPE she runs! Because, as Rush once noted on his program, she reminds too many men of their ex! What a boon THAT would be! :XD:
Go to
May 9, 2014 08:25:32   #
Patty wrote:
As of 2012, the most recent year for which data are available, there were about 49 million Americans who, sadly, describe themselves as "food insecure," meaning they have limited access to sufficient amounts of food, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Interviews with several food banks around the country suggest things haven't really improved since then. A new report from the hunger relief charity 'Feeding America' throws the nation’s struggle with hunger into an even starker light. The report, titled "Map the Meal Gap 2014," breaks the USDA’s data down county by county, giving a more nuanced picture of food insecurity. As the Interactive report below reveals, HuffPo notes that there are 16 counties in the U.S. with more than 100,000 "food insecure" children -- a number you might expect to see in a developing country rather than the world’s wealthiest nation.
Interactive map at link.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-08/where-are-americas-49-million-hungry-interactive-map
As of 2012, the most recent year for which data ar... (show quote)


,,,And yet, the U.S. is known to have one of the most generous "social safety nets" in the World! So, how can this be? Yes, I'm being a wiseacre here....By the way, thanks for the article! :thumbup:
Go to
May 9, 2014 08:17:45   #
Steve700 wrote:
In the movie coming out this summer, "No Place Like Utopia", they travel to different parts of the country – Detroit, Chicago, Newark, Washington DC, Denver, Miami – where there has been long term Democrate only leadership. There they meet people who have been seduced by utopian promises, only to realize they have been had, and no longer had a home left.

They continued to accept promise after promise that have all turned out to be empty, all turned out to be lies. The people I met who supported the progressive promise were literally living on government handouts, delapidated housing, abandoned houses and tents. Everything had changed for the worse – Detroit, South Side Chicago, Newark. Fifty years of progressive control of these cities demonstrated that no one was progressing, they were all regressing.

Throughout history, millions of people followed charlatans like Mao, Stalin, Ho Chi Mihn, Pol Pot, Castro — they all promised to create a Utopia, a paradise on earth, but instead, the people who followed them all arrived to a hell on earth – they were sent to the gulag, they were starved, and mass murdered by Utopians.

The word Utopia is from the Greek, it means “no Place.” Utopia is an imaginary, perfect society, heaven on earth, where everyone is happy. In Utopia, man has been perfected, all human beings are equal, and they think and act the same.

The idea of a perfect society was first mentioned by Plato in his work The Republic in 380 BC. The word “Utopia” was coined by Sir Thomas More in his 1516 book Utopia, in which he depicted a fictional island paradise in the Atlantic Ocean. In 1848, Karl Marx wrote in the C*******t Manifesto that it is historically inevitable for societies to pass through four stages: feudalism, capitalism, socialism, and finally c*******m. In c*******t society, Marx described a “workers paradise” where perfect happiness and universal fulfillment would be achieved though the abundance of goods and services that only a government controlled society could produce – Utopia!

In the modern era, socialists adopted the fictional idea of Utopia, Marx’s worker’s paradise, as a realistic blueprint for the nation state. Ruling over “paradise,” the leader of c*******t society was considered to be “God on earth.” However, the Marxist model was a disaster. Every country that adopted the Utopian ideology suffered economic devastation and biological destruction as 110 human beings were k**led in peacetime through starvation, gulags, political repression, and murder in an attempt to mold human beings to fit into Utopia.

In the beginning, c*******ts, progressives, used the phraseology like “we are going to organize the working man to fight and make a revolution, and o*******w the government.” Obama’s pals like Bill Ayers used this kind of rhetoric, and they acted on it. They planted bombs at the Pentagon, and murdered policemen, believing that the working classes would spontaneously join their c*******t revolution to destroy America.

But it didn’t work. It turned people off because it was evil. No normal person would want to bring down America and replace the constitution we were bequeathed by our founding fathers with the C*******t Manifesto. So into the 1970s, and by the early 80s, progressives realized they could not o*******w the government from the outside. They decided that if they changed their rhetoric, they could trick average Americans into supporting them, take power, and then use the power to bring down America from within.

And since the 1980s, the progressives, which they now call themselves rather than c*******ts, have slowly and successfully taken over the Democrat Party. Today their public terminology has become ever more benevolent. “We want to help to middle class families,” “we want fairness,” “we are problem solving” and “we want to help poor people” or just “change.” Fill in the blanks.

But make no mistake, today, the Democrat Party is a radical socialist party. For example, their leader is considered perfect and God-like, he cannot be criticized. There is no opposition within the Democrat Party. Any opposition from the outside the Democratic Party is considered to be evil. This is because socialism is a religion, it’s faith. If you don’t believe in their human God and their fantasy of Utopia, paradise on earth, you are the enemy. And who is God’s enemy? The devil. So, of course, you are the devil and you are evil because you oppose the one true God, the God on earth.

The Democrats tell this story every day. Good versus evil. They are telling and selling this story. Not our idea is better than yours because of these reasons. Good versus evil. We’re good, they’re evil.

I’ll give you some examples. They claim:

We represent all that is good and all that helps people toward progress, while the Republicans want to stop progress.

We want to help people with health care, and Republicans want people to die.

We want to help women get mammograms, and they want to prevent it.

We want rich Americans to pay their fair share, and Republicans are just greedy.
Good and evil.

We want to help more poor people get food stamps so they can eat, Republicans don’t mind if they starve.

We want to help black people and minorities have access to v**e, and Republicans want to stop them from v****g.

On and on. Now, if you were a progressive who believes this nonsense, it’s not difficult to feel justified in lying to the public, suppressing the v**es of conservatives using the IRS, lying about your agenda, lying about your background, lying about a dead US ambassador, lying about health care, committing v***r f***d — you would do anything, you would commit any crime, if you believed you were taking humanity step by step toward the perfect future, Utopia. And the Republicans were preventing it. The fantasy of Utopia is why progressives murdered 100 million people, 100 million were murdered by Utopians in power. That’s why the ideology of progressivism is so dangerous.

Let’s take one example of v**er ID and v***r f***d. Democrats have been hammering the idea it is “v**er suppression” if you advocate a v**er identification requirement or if you question “why did 140% of the population v**e in 10 counties in 2012?’ Here’s what I would like people to start talking about. Barack Obama started his political career by exposing v***r f***d! You may not know this, that’s right! Obama owes his career to his efforts to stop v***r f***d in Chicago. In 1995, when he ran for state senate against Alice Palmer, he challenged her petition signatures. Why would he suspect they might not be real? Obama had worked for Project V**e in 1992 in Chicago. Two thirds of the signatures were found to be not valid and Alice Palmer was disqualified.

So, let’s join Barack Obama’s initiative and investigate v***r r**********n fraud. We owe it to him to continue his good work!

Another example is the daily lie of Democrats: “The upper income people don’t pay their fair share of taxes.” The audacity of the lie just grows and grows, even though they know anybody can just Google it and find out that yes, the top income earners pay the highest percentage, the middle pay in the middle, and the lowest pay no taxes. All this disinformation, it’s Soviet era propaganda and they are trying to use Soviet censorship to keep anyone from speaking out against all these issues on which they want to control the narrative.

I hope everyone will go see "There’s No Place Like Utopia" this summer.
In the movie coming out this summer, "No Plac... (show quote)


Thanks for the post! I'll put it into my computer's memory, and see that movie when it comes out. Bye-the-bye, those gulags you mentioned....Well let's just say that something similar is being planned here: I believe they call them FEMA camps! In other words, BY DEFINITION, these Utopian Socialists just NEVER learn!
Go to
May 9, 2014 08:02:36   #
So what are ya kvetchin' about? King Obama PROMISED "Hope and Change," and, he DELIVERED! You just did-n't understand what he meant: As in, "Pardon me sir, but, could you spare any CHANGE?"....Welcome to the New Amerika! Aint it grand?! :mrgreen:
Go to
May 8, 2014 08:40:26   #
no propaganda please wrote:
thank you, I would prefer more ants, but the grasshoppers have eaten all our food.

Why in God's name would you brag about being a grasshopper, a l**ter and thief of other people's hard work? I would be ashamed to admit I was a leach.


You know, the DARNDEST PART is, I really MEANT to say, "Why are-n't there more of us ANTS around these days?" Is it safe to say that I'm having an "off" kind of day? :XD: :XD:
Go to
May 8, 2014 08:07:10   #
Steve700 wrote:
In the ancient fable, the ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and saving supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away (as so many of us would want to). Of course, come winter, the ant is warm and well fed. The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold. The ending of the version which I was read as a child has two sayings at the end: “Idleness brings want,” and “To work today is to eat tomorrow.”

In the modern version, the ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and preparing for the winter. He works hard, pays 50% in taxes to the government and spends ample time complying with government regulations as he prepares supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving. The liberal media lines up and supports protests against the rich ant – as they run ad naseum supporting stories of the shivering grasshopper.

The grasshopper hosts regular press conferences – and shocks Americans with the sharp contrast. Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries when they sing, “It’s Not Easy Being Green.” Occupy Wall Street stages a demonstration in front of the ant’s house where the news stations film the group ranting and raving against the 1%. Harry Reid stands up and calls the ant “un-American.”

The liberal Democrats blame President Bush, President Reagan, and others for the maligned grasshopper’s plight. There are countless petitions and wall-to-wall media coverage about how the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs. The story ends as we see the grasshopper and his friends finishing up the last bits of the ant’s food in a bid for e******y.

In a country where today people like Lloyd Blankfein and Sheldon Adelson are demonized, one wonders if America is on a path for a better tomorrow. Lloyd Blankfein is the chairman of Goldman Sachs who was raised in housing projects in the Bronx – his father was a clerk with the U.S. Postal Service (after he lost his job driving a bakery truck), and his mom was a receptionist. As a boy, he worked as a concession vendor at Yankee Stadium. Blankfein attended Harvard University on scholarship and had to work in the cafeteria to pay bills. The man is demonized – due to his success and it is vastly unfair.

Sheldon Adelson was born into a poor immigrant family, the son of a Boston cab driver – and today is the world’s 14th wealthiest man with a net worth approaching $25 billion dollars. He is ideological, driven and focused – and lives by the principles his father instilled in him: “honesty and integrity.” Yet, people like Adelson are demonized.

Success takes sacrifice – and rather than taking from the uber-successful, one should learn from and seek to emulate the uber-successful. It takes sacrifice and is not done easily – Making money and being successful is something to aspire to – not to take from them.

Modern version of an Asops Fable; From David Harowitz Front Page Magazine
In the ancient fable, the ant works hard in the wi... (show quote)

PRIMO!!! Only thing I want to know is: Why are-n't there more grasshoppers like us around, these days?
:mrgreen:
Go to
May 8, 2014 07:58:47   #
Evangel wrote:
Much has been said about what Obama should do to hurt the Russian economy. To me the plan to destroy Russia is simple:

1) ban their use of coal
2) mandate that Russia goes on Obamacare
3) ban drilling on Russian public land
4) force Russia to comply with EPA and Dodd Frank regulations
5) re-define the full-time Russian work week to 30 hours
6) raise the Russian minimum wage
7) mandate overtime pay for government employees
8) Demand the Russian Government provide welfare benefits to un-
qualified citizens and I*****l i*******ts

This plan is proven and has been working in the U. S. since 2009.
Much has been said about what Obama should do to h... (show quote)

EEGADS!!! I would-n't wish THAT on my worst ENEMY!!! Pity it's NOT our worst enemy. T***h is, we have met the enemy, and he is US! (Or, at least Regime supporters.)....
:shock: :shock:
Go to
May 7, 2014 08:58:51   #
NanaSue57 wrote:
:!: :!: :!:


MY, that was scrumptious! Darndest part was, at first I thought you were SERIOUS! And, I'll bet I'm not alone! :lol: :lol: :lol:
Go to
May 7, 2014 08:53:27   #
missinglink wrote:
Copy and paste from American Thinker.
We will never know the full story. This is a good start.
I don't know if the embedded links will work here. If not here's the web address.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/05/the_fast_and_furious_red_herring.html

By anonymous

The disappearing act known as the congressional Fast and Furious investigation made a brief return to the stage recently when U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder became unhinged during questioning by Representative Louis Gohmert (R). The trigger for his defiance was the mention by Rep. Gohmert of possible contempt charges over the Fast and Furious scandal. The AG’s admonition of “Don’t go there buddy,” started discussion as to why Holder reacted in such a strong manner. Sure, he’s hiding something, or someone, but are the White House, ATF, and the AG the only players?

In June 2011, Rep. Darrell Issa’s initial report was published detailing the facts about the operation. Two months later, in August 2011, a Washington Times report based on insider information, revealed the primary motive of the gunrunning was to covertly arm a favored drug cartel not by the ATF, but by the CIA. And in January of this year, American Thinker ran an article documenting a decade-long DEA deal with the drug cartels citing reports going back to the beginning of 2012. It seems Issa’s report generated some interesting responses from other three-letter agencies pretty quickly and consistently for several years. And make no mistake, anytime the CIA leaks to the media about a supposed covert mission, it sends a strong signal to the beltway elite. In this case, “back off.”

But the CIA leak raises an interesting issue, and that is the complete lack of evidence or testimony from intelligence organizations in the House Oversight Committee investigation. In particular, there is no information from the one U.S. military HQ which has responsibility for the security of the North American continent, including dealing with t***snational criminal organizations along our southern border. That HQ would be USNORTHCOM.

All combatant command HQ’s have a significant slice of the defense intelligence enterprise, including NORTHCOM, so one would think it could provide valuable information to Issa’s investigation. This would include assessments of foreign involvement in arms smuggling in order to compare data with the ATF on the extent of U.S.-based arms t***sfers. At least that’s what we’re told the ATF’s purpose of Fast and Furious was all about: to identify U.S. arms networks.

We know that at least one NORTHCOM commander made such an assessment on the situation when Admiral James A. Winnefeld, Jr., stated in his March 2011 posture statement (The March 2011 NORTHCOM Posture Statement is no longer available online at the Department of Defense website. A summary can be found at the Congressional Record, and may be requested from the Catalog of US Government Publications) that T***snational Criminal Organizations (TCOs),

“…are vicious, well-financed and heavily armed, due in no small part to cash and weapons smuggled across our southern border.” [Emphasis added]

To dare tread on such a politically sensitive subject, the Admiral’s intelligence apparatus must have had some idea as to what the “no small part” was in contrast to foreign suppliers and smugglers -- right? Also, his statement was made nearly two years after Fox News busted the myth of the “90 percent” of weapons seized in Mexico as coming from the U.S., and one month after Stratfor reinforced the Fox News analysis.

Obviously, we have no access to the classified reports the Admiral used to make his judgments on weapons smuggling. However, intelligence agencies have years of experience in analyzing smuggling operations of both conventional and unconventional weapons in foreign countries. Since operational procedures are common across the spectrum of smuggling banned weapons and substances, and given NORTHCOM’s intelligence collection capabilities and information sharing protocols with domestic agencies, it should be a matter of standard intelligence practices to make a reasonable determination of who is smuggling what. Suffice to say that the facts in Rep. Issa’s report are so out of the norm of smugglers’ standard procedures, that it calls into question the ATF’s basic premise of the operation, the Admiral’s statement, and the supposed CIA smuggling effort.

Go with What They Know

An old rule of thumb for quickly arming any organization is to stick with armaments they are familiar with. The cartels’ manpower consists of a significant number of Mexican army and police force deserters who bring their weapons with em. For the TCOs along our southern border, this means G-3 HK (made under license in Mexico, so why bother with smuggling AK-47s?), which fire NATO 7.62x51mm ammo. The G-3 is scheduled to be replaced with the new FX-05 Xiuhcoatl (Fire Serpent) assault rifle, which uses 5.56x45mm ammo. This is the same round used by the U.S. M-16/M-4 series.

Indeed, smuggling of M-16s and G-3s has an historical precedent in the Latin American region. Cuban assistance to the Nicaraguan Sandinistas in the late 70s consisted of U.S. M-16s captured in Vietnam and West German G-3s from international arms dealers. Soviet-made AK-47s were specifically left out of the equation to gain international sympathy for the “freedom fighters.” These same types of Western arms were also supplied to many of the liberation groups in South America.

Yet, in Fast and Furious and/or the covert CIA operation -- take your pick -- the weapon most smuggled from the U.S.? AK-47 variants using ammo not compatible with the G-3, M-16, or the new Fire Serpent rifle. I’m not saying that the cartels don’t use AK-47s. I’m saying the singular focus on AKs is suspect since the ATF gave no rationale for smuggling these weapons for an operation designed to identify smuggling networks. If one is going to smuggle something, it should support the customer’s requirements. And if Admiral Winnefield was so concerned about the issue, surely his intelligence sections would have a handle on the types of weapons used by the TCOs, as would the CIA, which knew that the Sinaloa cartel in particular has close ties with the Mexican military.

Buy Bulk, Smuggle Big

If it’s highly unlikely a cartel would put in a request for a shipment of a single type of weapon without large quantities of ammo to logistically support them, it’s also unlikely to make a purchase in such relatively low numbers. This principle has been discussed in great detail by the NRA’s Wayne La Pierre in his excellent article here. The key point is that if a cartel is capable of smuggling billions of dollars worth of drugs using airliners and cargo ships from Central America, why would it buy firearms in penny packets and attempt to get them across the U.S. -- Mexico border?

I won’t belabor the point, but some clarification is required from NORTHCOM’s intelligence section on the rationale for the commander’s statement of weapons coming from the U.S. “in no small part.” In 2009, the Washington Times reported that the two largest cartels, the Sinaloa and Los Zetas, have over 100,000 foot soldiers. Against this requirement, the ATF/CIA smuggled a grand total of 1800-plus weapons.

Cost could have been a factor. But deals for large numbers of weapons would likely have a “bulk” rate rather than purchases of six to ten rifles at a pop, and come from cheaper sources as was done in the region during the 70s. Rogue organization structure, cartel strength, and global weapons tracing are the intelligence organizations’ bread and butter. Are they that off base as to provide assessments to the Admiral in contravention of historical data?

Employ Smuggling Experts

This simple fact probably escapes many in the Beltway crowd, but the intelligence community and our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan can attest to the fact that a smuggler is a smuggler and is capable of t***sporting many commodities. From banned chemical and nuclear materials, conventional firearms, oil, and critical technology, the established smugglers and buyers are the preferred means for terrorists and drug cartels to move these items.

First, smugglers and buyers work hard to establish a legitimate pattern of life to throw off surveillance. One day, Joe’s Central Produce is carrying heads of lettuce; the next day, heads of lettuce with rifles or radiological material stored underneath. This pattern is developed over a considerable period of time, not to mention spending weeks and months templating t***sit points with weak security or border guards susceptible to bribes.

Second, they obviously don’t want to draw attention to their illegal activities. Time and again, investigations of terror groups and smugglers reveal that remaining under the radar becomes more difficult the more complex the weapon is, such as the case when making weaponized chemical agents, or repeatedly going back to the same old well for banned weapons or materiel. Violations of these principles in Fast and Furious would have been laughable, if it wasn’t so tragic in its consequences. Here are some examples:

Jaime Avila was entered as a suspect in the investigation by ATF on November 25, 2009, [snip]… Over the next month and a half, Avila purchased 13 more weapons… Then on January 16, 2010, Avila purchased three AK-47 style rifles, two of which ended up being found at the murder scene of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.
…watching a guy go into the same gun store (emphasis added) buying another 15 or 20 AK-47s or variants or . . . five or ten Draco pistols or FN Five-sevens . . . guys that don’t have a job, and he is walking in here spending $27,000 for three Barrett .50 calibers

And my personal favorite:

…a 22-year-old girl walks in and dumps $10,000 on . . . AK-47s in a day, when she is driving a beat up car that doesn’t have enough metal to hold hubcaps on it.

The fact is the ATF knew most of the buyers before the operation began and either explicitly or implicitly gave the green light to buy guns illegally. That is, there was no need for the purchasers to establish any pattern of legitimacy or worry about flying below the radar. On top of this, the buyers t***sferred the weapons to “third parties” who moved them across the border. Who were the cross-border smugglers? Well, we don’t know, since the ATF withdrew its surveillance to allow the guns to walk. As many others have concluded, the only thing flying under the radar was the administration’s effort to build a case for more gun control.

From a congressional oversight standpoint, not only did the House subcommittee leave the intelligence aspect unexamined, but two months after Issa’s report, enter the CIA answering the unasked questions. However, the revelation of the supposed arming of the Sinaloa cartel is somewhat surprising for a couple of reasons. First is the totally slapdash nature of the operation. To think that the ATF would piggyback on a covert CIA operation conducted in such an incompetent manner is asinine -- or for the ATF, maybe not. Second, having gotten wind of the operation in 2009, both the CIA and DEA complained about the gunwalking effort to the White House through the National Security Council. Yet in 2011, the agency miraculously revealed its own covert scheme to arm the Sinaloa cartel after the publication of the oversight committee’s initial report. In other words, the CIA was against it, before it was for it.

Congressional inaction on something this important is usually for a reason other than laziness. Eventually, someone was bound to question the intelligence community’s contribution either officially or in the cloistered, unofficial beltway network, or admittedly against improbable odds, in the media. A leaked covert operation is just the ticket to get out in front of the issue to shield the community and the administration from intel’s likely involvement in constructing a case for Fast and Furious, and to tout the ever popular interagency cooperation meme.

For its part, USNORTHCOM was perhaps dangerously close to following an infamous historical precedent from the Clinton administration. In 1993, prior to the ATF raid on the Koresh compound outside of Waco, TX, JTF-6 signed on to the ATF’s highly dubious claim that a meth lab was present on the compound. This allegation came after ATF was told it could receive military assistance without reimbursing the Army only if drugs were involved. For unknown reasons; maybe political pressure, continued funding, or in an effort to prove its relevance, JTF-6 willfully ignored several warning signs that the drug aspect was a fabrication used by the ATF to get military equipment and training free of charge. The big difference between then and now is the robust interagency intelligence sharing protocols established since 9-11. Despite good intentions, this potentially can lead to mutually supporting influence peddling among the intel players in the HQs and with higher authority.

For politicians, the tried and true national security/intel operation distracter still works to provide cover to prevent investigations from holding people accountable for their criminal acts. Outside the beltway, the information age, coupled with coverage of multiple scandals involving the Obama administration and its national security apparatus renders this strategy obsolete. A congressional committee investigation has a challenge in this area, however. If we thought subpoenaed emails were difficult to obtain for the B******i investigation, classified documents would be more problematic. It’s also possible that the assessments have either been purged from the system or the audit trail has been gradually massaged over the years to reflect reporting more in tune with reality. If Issa decides to reenergize the investigation he should turn to the people side of the equation, and hope someone like Brigadier General Lovell will come forward to speak the t***h about Fast and Furious.

Anonymous is a former member of the intelligence community who has had assignments in Europe and the Middle East. He currently lives overseas.
Copy and paste from American Thinker. br We will n... (show quote)

There is NOTHING to see here! Don't look behind that curtain!!! Go away!!!
:mrgreen:
Go to
May 7, 2014 08:47:55   #
hprinze wrote:
When he was Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel made this disturbingly honest quote, “You never let a serious crisis go to waste.” The hysteria surrounding the latest administration report on g****l w*****g implies a variation on that dictum, “Never miss an opportunity to create a serious crisis.” Though many of the crises created or compounded by the administration are real enough, the release of the National Climate Assessment has been hyped (abetted by much of the media) with bogus claims of past, current and predicted climate impacts.

NCA Quote: “Precipitation patterns are changing”

Reality: Precipitation patterns were never constant. Creating a crisis from the normal allows climate catastrophists to point to every a******l bit of wet or dry as being “consistent with models” that predict one horrible outcome or another.

NCA Quote: “sea level is rising”

Reality: Yes sea level is rising, which it has done since the end of the last ice age. But the frequent claims and predictions of accelerating sea-level rise are not borne out in the data. In fact sea-level rise has slowed recently. One main-stream climatologist says this variation “makes the 21st century of sea level rise projections seem like unjustified arm waving.”

NCA Quote: “the frequency and intensity of some e*****e w*****r events are increasing”

Reality: The latest report on the science from The Intergovernmental Panel on C*****e C****e and analysis provided by the adminstration’s own National Climatic Data Center conclude that there isn’t a case for e*****e w*****r increases – no significant trends for floods, droughts, hurricanes or tornadoes.

NCA Quote: “In Arctic Alaska, the summer sea ice that once protected the coasts has receded”

Reality: G****l w*****g is supposedly global. Global sea ice (Arctic and Antarctic) is above average and, for this time of year, it is at its highest level in 30 years, which is the third-highest on record.

The authors apparently do not think anybody is checking their statements or they couldn’t possibly think they would get away with this one:

NCA Quote: “It is notable that as these data records have grown longer and climate models have become more comprehensive, earlier predictions have largely been confirmed.”

Reality: The past 15 years have seen the climate model predictions stray farther and farther from actual temperatures (here and here). Last year, prominent climatologist, Hans von Storch, said, “If things continue as they have been, in five years, at the latest, we will need to acknowledge that something is fundamentally wrong with our climate models.” Maybe Professor von Storch needs four more years to be sure the models are wrong, but there are no grounds on which the models can be declared “confirmed.” Instead, the predictions are getting worse and worse.
When he was Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel m... (show quote)

Alright, you get all that, and so do I. But, just as you've made clear, the Regime will always LEAP at ANY opportunity to create some artificial "crisis," in order to justify seizing more power over it's subjects. (And, according to the Obama Regime, we are all SUBJECTS, NOT CITIZENS!)

The other problem is that we have a large liberal e*****rate, for whom "g****l w*****g-c*****e c****e" is an article of FAITH, a religion, NOT a belief, based on scientific fact or evidence. We can argue science and facts until we're both blue in the face. But, when we try to challenge someone's RELIGION, don't count on a very receptive audience! They've been brainwashed for at least twenty years now, from school onward. And, having rejected all so-called "organized religions," Obama's sycophants will, of course, seek to fill that remaining spiritual void SOMEHOW. Hence, the religion of g****l w*****g, complete with it's "sins," srtificial guilt, and "absolution,"--e.g. simply submit it MORE government tyranny over our lives!

That we are taking on and challenging religion here, will be DELICIOUSLY evidenced by the scrumptiously h**eful replies you'll be receiving for the rest of the day, by readers here! Then again, does-n't that make tweeking them all the more fun?!
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
Go to
May 7, 2014 08:47:55   #
hprinze wrote:
When he was Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel made this disturbingly honest quote, “You never let a serious crisis go to waste.” The hysteria surrounding the latest administration report on g****l w*****g implies a variation on that dictum, “Never miss an opportunity to create a serious crisis.” Though many of the crises created or compounded by the administration are real enough, the release of the National Climate Assessment has been hyped (abetted by much of the media) with bogus claims of past, current and predicted climate impacts.

NCA Quote: “Precipitation patterns are changing”

Reality: Precipitation patterns were never constant. Creating a crisis from the normal allows climate catastrophists to point to every a******l bit of wet or dry as being “consistent with models” that predict one horrible outcome or another.

NCA Quote: “sea level is rising”

Reality: Yes sea level is rising, which it has done since the end of the last ice age. But the frequent claims and predictions of accelerating sea-level rise are not borne out in the data. In fact sea-level rise has slowed recently. One main-stream climatologist says this variation “makes the 21st century of sea level rise projections seem like unjustified arm waving.”

NCA Quote: “the frequency and intensity of some e*****e w*****r events are increasing”

Reality: The latest report on the science from The Intergovernmental Panel on C*****e C****e and analysis provided by the adminstration’s own National Climatic Data Center conclude that there isn’t a case for e*****e w*****r increases – no significant trends for floods, droughts, hurricanes or tornadoes.

NCA Quote: “In Arctic Alaska, the summer sea ice that once protected the coasts has receded”

Reality: G****l w*****g is supposedly global. Global sea ice (Arctic and Antarctic) is above average and, for this time of year, it is at its highest level in 30 years, which is the third-highest on record.

The authors apparently do not think anybody is checking their statements or they couldn’t possibly think they would get away with this one:

NCA Quote: “It is notable that as these data records have grown longer and climate models have become more comprehensive, earlier predictions have largely been confirmed.”

Reality: The past 15 years have seen the climate model predictions stray farther and farther from actual temperatures (here and here). Last year, prominent climatologist, Hans von Storch, said, “If things continue as they have been, in five years, at the latest, we will need to acknowledge that something is fundamentally wrong with our climate models.” Maybe Professor von Storch needs four more years to be sure the models are wrong, but there are no grounds on which the models can be declared “confirmed.” Instead, the predictions are getting worse and worse.
When he was Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel m... (show quote)

Alright, you get all that, and so do I. But, just as you've made clear, the Regime will always LEAP at ANY opportunity to create some artificial "crisis," in order to justify seizing more power over it's subjects. (And, according to the Obama Regime, we are all SUBJECTS, NOT CITIZENS!)

The other problem is that we have a large liberal e*****rate, for whom "g****l w*****g-c*****e c****e" is an article of FAITH, a religion, NOT a belief, based on scientific fact or evidence. We can argue science and facts until we're both blue in the face. But, when we try to challenge someone's RELIGION, don't count on a very receptive audience! They've been brainwashed for at least twenty years now, from school onward. And, having rejected all so-called "organized religions," Obama's sycophants will, of course, seek to fill that remaining spiritual void SOMEHOW. Hence, the religion of g****l w*****g, complete with it's "sins," srtificial guilt, and "absolution,"--e.g. simply submit it MORE government tyranny over our lives!

That we are taking on and challenging religion here, will be DELICIOUSLY evidenced by the scrumptiously h**eful replies you'll be receiving for the rest of the day, by readers here! Then again, does-n't that make tweeking them all the more fun?!
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
Go to
May 1, 2014 09:27:39   #
Floyd Brown wrote:
I would say the basic issue is it a choice or an Obligation.

Is it the rule of the land that every one must have a proper ID. Then I would say that if that is not the case then there is no case that you can take away a persons right to v**e.

If you feel there is that need to have a proper ID to v**e then you need to set up the system of having the proper ID for all.
You need to do this at no additional cost to the person involved. You can't charge a person to v**e it is a free right.

The thing is to v**e one needs to show here one lives.
For the most part one only needs to show that the person pays a bill at the current address.

Let's just say that the system mostly has & dose work.

Work on what it will take to build the system of a universal ID that shows current residence then require it for v****g.
I would say the basic issue is it a choice or an O... (show quote)

You state that one cannot be charged for what is a free right. Point well-taken. But, remember, the state-issued ID is FREE, MEANING NO-COST! And, if it is required to t***sact any other state or official business (and, it clearly is), then why not use it at the b****t box?.....UNLESS.....Just maybe ENSURING v***r f***d is what it's REALLY all about, thanks to yet ANOTHER corrupt Clintonista judge?.....Just sayin'!
Go to
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.