Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
NYTimes "public editor" knows her Heinlein...
47 views
Skip to first unread message
danny burstein
May 10, 2013, 8:07:57 PM5/10/13
to
from her column today about the coverage of
the Benghazi attack:
====
The failures of government transparency, too,
cross party lines. Rooted in political expediency,
those failures of transparency know no color,
neither red nor blue. And they need to be pointed
out and resisted. As author Robert A. Heinlein
wrote, "Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny."
http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/09/transparency-secrecy-and-retaliation-emerge-as-major-issues-in-benghazi-coverage
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
the Benghazi attack:
====
The failures of government transparency, too,
cross party lines. Rooted in political expediency,
those failures of transparency know no color,
neither red nor blue. And they need to be pointed
out and resisted. As author Robert A. Heinlein
wrote, "Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny."
http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/09/transparency-secrecy-and-retaliation-emerge-as-major-issues-in-benghazi-coverage
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Puppet_Sock
May 15, 2013, 4:37:03 PM5/15/13
to
On May 10, 8:07 pm, danny burstein <dan...@panix.com> wrote:
[snip]
[quote from a journalist's blog]
While it's cool that somebody knows about RAH, it's not so
cool that "both sides do it" is code for "the dems did it
this time and we want to deflect attention and will go as
far as we need to in order to do that."
The POTUS abandoned an ambassador and support staff to
the mob. They were slaughtered. Now the POTUS is shrugging
and saying, eh, what are you going to do?
What do you suppose RAH would have done if he had been
informed a mob was attacking an embassy? Do you suppose
he would have gone to bed?
[snip]
[quote from a journalist's blog]
> The failures of government transparency, too,
> cross party lines.
[snip]
> cross party lines.
While it's cool that somebody knows about RAH, it's not so
cool that "both sides do it" is code for "the dems did it
this time and we want to deflect attention and will go as
far as we need to in order to do that."
The POTUS abandoned an ambassador and support staff to
the mob. They were slaughtered. Now the POTUS is shrugging
and saying, eh, what are you going to do?
What do you suppose RAH would have done if he had been
informed a mob was attacking an embassy? Do you suppose
he would have gone to bed?
danny burstein
May 15, 2013, 4:49:42 PM5/15/13
to
In <b9fdf68c-f351-4eba...@g9g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> Puppet_Sock <puppe...@hotmail.com> writes:
>On May 10, 8:07=A0pm, danny burstein <dan...@panix.com> wrote:
>[snip]
>[quote from a journalist's blog]
>> The failures of government transparency, too,
>> cross party lines.
>[snip]
You might consider taking hefty doses of magnesium.
It's a good treatment for kneejerks, and might
even help with your ODS.
[ODS = Obama Derangement Syndrome]
--
>On May 10, 8:07=A0pm, danny burstein <dan...@panix.com> wrote:
>[snip]
>[quote from a journalist's blog]
>> The failures of government transparency, too,
>> cross party lines.
>[snip]
>The POTUS abandoned an ambassador and support staff to
>the mob. They were slaughtered. Now the POTUS is shrugging
>and saying, eh, what are you going to do?
[snip]
>the mob. They were slaughtered. Now the POTUS is shrugging
>and saying, eh, what are you going to do?
You might consider taking hefty doses of magnesium.
It's a good treatment for kneejerks, and might
even help with your ODS.
[ODS = Obama Derangement Syndrome]
--
Chris Zakes
May 15, 2013, 6:28:38 PM5/15/13
to
On Wed, 15 May 2013 20:49:42 +0000 (UTC), an orbital mind-control
laser caused danny burstein <dan...@panix.com> to write:
>In <b9fdf68c-f351-4eba...@g9g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> Puppet_Sock <puppe...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>>On May 10, 8:07=A0pm, danny burstein <dan...@panix.com> wrote:
>>[snip]
>>[quote from a journalist's blog]
>>> The failures of government transparency, too,
>>> cross party lines.
>>[snip]
>
>>The POTUS abandoned an ambassador and support staff to
>>the mob. They were slaughtered. Now the POTUS is shrugging
>>and saying, eh, what are you going to do?
>
>[snip]
>
>You might consider taking hefty doses of magnesium.
>It's a good treatment for kneejerks, and might
>even help with your ODS.
>
>[ODS = Obama Derangement Syndrome]
Um... The US ambassador and three staff members killed by a mob in
laser caused danny burstein <dan...@panix.com> to write:
>In <b9fdf68c-f351-4eba...@g9g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> Puppet_Sock <puppe...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>>On May 10, 8:07=A0pm, danny burstein <dan...@panix.com> wrote:
>>[snip]
>>[quote from a journalist's blog]
>>> The failures of government transparency, too,
>>> cross party lines.
>>[snip]
>
>>The POTUS abandoned an ambassador and support staff to
>>the mob. They were slaughtered. Now the POTUS is shrugging
>>and saying, eh, what are you going to do?
>
>[snip]
>
>You might consider taking hefty doses of magnesium.
>It's a good treatment for kneejerks, and might
>even help with your ODS.
>
>[ODS = Obama Derangement Syndrome]
Lybia. That is undeniable.
What *did* the US government do to deal with this situation at the
time?
And why did they spend weeks afterwards claiming the attack grew out
of a spontaneous protest about an insulting video, when they were told
*that evening* that it was a terrorist attack?
-Chris Zakes
Texas
--
A properly balanced sword is the most versatile weapon for close quarters ever
devised... A sword never jams, never has to be reloaded, it is always ready.
-Oscar Gordon in "Glory Road" by Robert Heinlein
danny burstein
May 15, 2013, 6:58:03 PM5/15/13
to
In <se28p8p1k9o66ognn...@4ax.com> Chris Zakes <dont...@gmail.com> writes:
>What *did* the US government do to deal with this situation at the
>time?
Forget the magnesium. You should go stright to the electroshock.
>What *did* the US government do to deal with this situation at the
>time?
MajorOz
May 15, 2013, 7:27:39 PM5/15/13
to
On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 5:58:03 PM UTC-5, danny burstein wrote:
> In <se28p8p1k9o66ognn...@4ax.com> Chris Zakes <dont...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>
>
> >What *did* the US government do to deal with this situation at the
>
> >time?
>
>
>
> Forget the magnesium. You should go stright to the electroshock.
...time to follow Maureen's advice...
> In <se28p8p1k9o66ognn...@4ax.com> Chris Zakes <dont...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>
>
> >What *did* the US government do to deal with this situation at the
>
> >time?
>
>
>
> Forget the magnesium. You should go stright to the electroshock.
Simon Jester UK
May 16, 2013, 4:18:29 AM5/16/13
to
"danny burstein" <dan...@panix.com> wrote:
> In <se28p8p1k9o66ognn...@4ax.com> Chris Zakes
> <dont...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>What *did* the US government do to deal with this situation at the
>>time?
>
> Forget the magnesium. You should go stright to the electroshock.
Been a long time since I did this:
> In <se28p8p1k9o66ognn...@4ax.com> Chris Zakes
> <dont...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>What *did* the US government do to deal with this situation at the
>>time?
>
> Forget the magnesium. You should go stright to the electroshock.
SPLAT.
Hmmm... I guess certain substances are too squishy to go "plonk".
Chris Zakes
May 16, 2013, 7:43:24 AM5/16/13
to
On Wed, 15 May 2013 22:58:03 +0000 (UTC), an orbital mind-control
veer off into irrelevant insults instead."
>In <se28p8p1k9o66ognn...@4ax.com> Chris Zakes <dont...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>What *did* the US government do to deal with this situation at the
>>time?
>
>Forget the magnesium. You should go stright to the electroshock.
In other words, "I don't have a good answer for this question, so I'll
>
>>What *did* the US government do to deal with this situation at the
>>time?
>
>Forget the magnesium. You should go stright to the electroshock.
veer off into irrelevant insults instead."
danny burstein
May 16, 2013, 9:43:43 AM5/16/13
to
In <1gh9p81uiprfqiv6n...@4ax.com> Chris Zakes <dont...@gmail.com> writes:
>In other words, "I don't have a good answer for this question, so I'll
>veer off into irrelevant insults instead."
Nope, it's simply giving you the response your idiocy and flamebait
>In other words, "I don't have a good answer for this question, so I'll
>veer off into irrelevant insults instead."
deserves, namely a combination of derision and scorn.
reilloc
May 16, 2013, 11:24:12 AM5/16/13
to
LNC
Puppet_Sock
May 16, 2013, 4:32:22 PM5/16/13
to
[snip]
the consulate had marked the source of the RPG attacks.
They had painted it with a laser marker, such as is
used to paint targets for air strikes.
They had it painted for 7 hours. During those 7 hours
those two marines killed about 75 attackers.
At the very least, RAH would have acted. He would have
had jets overhead, breaking windows with sonic booms.
He would have told them to drop ammo for the marines
in the consulate. He would have told them to launch
on the laser painted RPG launch site. And he would
have been sending assistance with all possible speed.
Maybe it would arrive too late, maybe not. But it
would be on the way.
He would have been on the phone to any govt that still
existed in the area, explaining to them that they better
do something to quiet the situation, or they'd be on
the receiving end. And PDQ. A consulate is sovereign
territory. These attacks were attacks on US soil.
And more to the point, he would have been doing something
in the weeks leading up to this event. When the consulate
requested additional security because an important
anniversary was coming up, and AlQ was smarting from
a recent drone strike. He would either have sent them
a full contingent, or he'd have removed them. He would
not have left them there to be eaten.
> > What do you suppose RAH would have done if he had been
> > informed a mob was attacking an embassy? Do you suppose
> > he would have gone to bed?
>
> Tell us, since you imply that you know.
It turns out that the two marines who were defending
> > informed a mob was attacking an embassy? Do you suppose
> > he would have gone to bed?
>
> Tell us, since you imply that you know.
the consulate had marked the source of the RPG attacks.
They had painted it with a laser marker, such as is
used to paint targets for air strikes.
They had it painted for 7 hours. During those 7 hours
those two marines killed about 75 attackers.
At the very least, RAH would have acted. He would have
had jets overhead, breaking windows with sonic booms.
He would have told them to drop ammo for the marines
in the consulate. He would have told them to launch
on the laser painted RPG launch site. And he would
have been sending assistance with all possible speed.
Maybe it would arrive too late, maybe not. But it
would be on the way.
He would have been on the phone to any govt that still
existed in the area, explaining to them that they better
do something to quiet the situation, or they'd be on
the receiving end. And PDQ. A consulate is sovereign
territory. These attacks were attacks on US soil.
And more to the point, he would have been doing something
in the weeks leading up to this event. When the consulate
requested additional security because an important
anniversary was coming up, and AlQ was smarting from
a recent drone strike. He would either have sent them
a full contingent, or he'd have removed them. He would
not have left them there to be eaten.
tian
May 16, 2013, 8:08:33 PM5/16/13
to
Before I do that let me just say it's a pleasure to see activity here!
--
Tian
http://tian.greens.org
Latest: March for Immigration Refrom event in Mountain View.
There is a one world pin on an New Mexico quarter in my home now.
Chris Zakes
May 16, 2013, 8:44:22 PM5/16/13
to
On Thu, 16 May 2013 13:43:43 +0000 (UTC), an orbital mind-control
If a simple question, to wit: "What *did* the US government do to deal
with this situation at the time?" qualifies as "idiocy and flamebait",
then I suggest you need a better dictionary.
>In <1gh9p81uiprfqiv6n...@4ax.com> Chris Zakes <dont...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>In other words, "I don't have a good answer for this question, so I'll
>>veer off into irrelevant insults instead."
>
>Nope, it's simply giving you the response your idiocy and flamebait
>deserves, namely a combination of derision and scorn.
Still dodging the question, I see.
>
>>In other words, "I don't have a good answer for this question, so I'll
>>veer off into irrelevant insults instead."
>
>Nope, it's simply giving you the response your idiocy and flamebait
>deserves, namely a combination of derision and scorn.
If a simple question, to wit: "What *did* the US government do to deal
with this situation at the time?" qualifies as "idiocy and flamebait",
then I suggest you need a better dictionary.
danny burstein
May 16, 2013, 9:38:17 PM5/16/13
to
In <n4vap8hb70go0rmgh...@4ax.com> Chris Zakes <dont...@gmail.com> writes:
>Still dodging the question, I see.
Nope. Just giving you the attention, or lack thereof,
>Still dodging the question, I see.
that you deserve.
Maybe maniacal laughter would be better.
loupgarous
May 17, 2013, 9:58:20 AM5/17/13
to
I'll be interested in what a Select Committee has to say about Benghazi. Until then, what we have from both sides of the aisle on this issue smells like team spirit - it'd have been nice, if unrealistic, to see the Republicans hold fire until AFTER the hearings produced damning details, and the Administration appoint a Special Prosecutor to look into its alleged misdeeds as Bush fils did for Plamegate, Clinton did for Monicagate, Reagan did for Irangate, and indeed, Nixon did for Watergate.
Every Administration since and including Nixon accused of serious malfeasance has appointed a special prosecutor to look into the allegations, even when (as happened under Nixon, Reagan, Clinton and Bush the Younger) the results weren't going to help the Administration. That is, every Adminstration BUT the one that was going to give us "unparalleled transparency in government" and since its first inauguration gave us closed-door meetings and multi-million dollar disbursements to friends of the Administation from a Stimulus fund, instead.
Those who endorse Obama's subpoenas of the Associated Press' phone records are silent on the amount of administration-approved leaks of tradecraft and other classified details of the bin Laden takedown. Mr. Obama wouldn't have needed subpoenas to determine the source of THOSE leaks, just a White House phone directory. If President Obama was anxious about leaks, the leaks occurring of how Osama bin Laden was found and taken down - as damaging as they may have been to any special operator who wanted to use those same assets and tactics again - would have been the place to start.
Socks, don't get me wrong - I agree that, from his writings, a hypothetical Robert A. Heinlein administration might have been giving the Defense Support Network phones a workout and sending special assets (like the Marine Force Recon detachment in the Sigonella Naval Air Station, 400 miles from Libya (a three-hour copter ride, in other words) and more conventional armed support from US Africa Command to the aid of our besieged, soon to be dead Ambassador in Benghazi. There'd have been some sort of effectual defense of our people in Benghazi. In fact, security of those grounds would never have been left in the hands of a local "militia" - if we (as the Administration and its friends in the Senate imply) didn't have the money to defend Americans in an overseas mission full of hotheads with aircraft cannon mounted on pickup trucks, we would have left representation of American interests to another nation's mission which DID have that funding.
Another nitpick - embassy and consulate grounds aren't extraterritorial. They remain the soil of the host government. But going back over two international agreements negotiated in Vienna, the last in the 1960s, they have been deemed under the control of the embassy occupying them. So the Marines inside Benghazi and the actual embassy (presumably in Tripoli itself) had the right to defend Americans and nationals of other states under American protection inside the grounds. They couldn't LEGALLY stage an armed defense of those grounds as American soil because that's never been the case.
Vance Frickey
Colorado
reilloc
May 17, 2013, 11:00:22 AM5/17/13
to
one embassy. Next, you'll make the case that the President of the United
States ought to be keeping an eye on one person and blame him,
personally, if that guy stubs his toe.
How about this: we lost a couple of good people in that embassy because
the President of the United States dropped the ball and didn't focus all
his attention on the situation; how about what happened back in
September of 2001. New York City is a lot closer than an embassy in the
middle east and somebody who was President of the United States...
Well, you get what I mean--that is you get what I mean if you understand
that I mean your bullshit whining and blame laying is bullshit partisan
drivel.
LNC
lal_truckee
May 17, 2013, 12:28:03 PM5/17/13
to
On 5/17/13 8:00 AM, reilloc wrote:
>
> The President of the United States has nothing to do but keep an eye on
> one embassy.
For instance, IIRC there was a simultaneous and far larger
>
> The President of the United States has nothing to do but keep an eye on
> one embassy.
demonstration/attack at the embassy in much more important Egypt that
might have required some thought.
Or he may have been reading about a pet goat and become engrossed. I do
believer that's a well established and alternative.
Chris Zakes
May 17, 2013, 9:20:40 PM5/17/13
to
On Fri, 17 May 2013 01:38:17 +0000 (UTC), an orbital mind-control
haven't done so. Obviously you *can't* answer the question, and
attempting to have an intelligent conversation with you is a waste of
time.
>In <n4vap8hb70go0rmgh...@4ax.com> Chris Zakes <dont...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>Still dodging the question, I see.
>
>Nope. Just giving you the attention, or lack thereof,
>that you deserve.
>
>Maybe maniacal laughter would be better.
Okay, you've had three chances to answer a simple question, and
>
>>Still dodging the question, I see.
>
>Nope. Just giving you the attention, or lack thereof,
>that you deserve.
>
>Maybe maniacal laughter would be better.
haven't done so. Obviously you *can't* answer the question, and
attempting to have an intelligent conversation with you is a waste of
time.
Chris Zakes
May 17, 2013, 9:59:30 PM5/17/13
to
Control during the 9-11 attacks? They had a total of 26 minutes (8:19
to 8:45) from the initial report of a hijacking until the first plane
hit the world Trade Center. If you read those reports, you'll see a
lot of confusion about what's going on.
President Bush was informed of the hit at 8:50. The second tower was
hit at 9:03. What, exactly, do you think he should have done during
those 13 minutes that wasn't already being done by the military? The
Pentagon was hit at 9:37 and Flight 93 crashed at 10:03. Again, what
should the president have done that wasn't already being done by the
military?
reilloc
May 21, 2013, 4:15:28 PM5/21/13
to
On 5/17/2013 8:20 PM, Chris Zakes wrote:
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 01:38:17 +0000 (UTC), an orbital mind-control
> laser caused danny burstein <dan...@panix.com> to write:
>
>> In <n4vap8hb70go0rmgh...@4ax.com> Chris Zakes <dont...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Still dodging the question, I see.
>>
>> Nope. Just giving you the attention, or lack thereof,
>> that you deserve.
>>
>> Maybe maniacal laughter would be better.
>
> Okay, you've had three chances to answer a simple question, and
> haven't done so. Obviously you *can't* answer the question, and
> attempting to have an intelligent conversation with you is a waste of
> time.
He's told you, repeatedly, that your questions are stupid. Why are you
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 01:38:17 +0000 (UTC), an orbital mind-control
> laser caused danny burstein <dan...@panix.com> to write:
>
>> In <n4vap8hb70go0rmgh...@4ax.com> Chris Zakes <dont...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Still dodging the question, I see.
>>
>> Nope. Just giving you the attention, or lack thereof,
>> that you deserve.
>>
>> Maybe maniacal laughter would be better.
>
> Okay, you've had three chances to answer a simple question, and
> haven't done so. Obviously you *can't* answer the question, and
> attempting to have an intelligent conversation with you is a waste of
> time.
not getting the point?
LNC
reilloc
May 21, 2013, 4:19:55 PM5/21/13
to
I'm surprised you didn't pick the timeframe, say, between 8:59, when
Shrub understood what he was being told, to 9:03 to make it even tighter.
LNC
Chris Zakes
May 21, 2013, 8:27:05 PM5/21/13
to
newsgroup is practically dead, and I was hoping to inject a little
life into it. Obviously, however, he was only interested in trolling.
(Kind of like your behavior, actually: baseless insults, rather than
intelligent conversation.)
tian
May 22, 2013, 2:26:41 AM5/22/13
to
On 05/21/2013 05:27 PM, Chris Zakes wrote:
> On Tue, 21 May 2013 15:15:28 -0500, an orbital mind-control laser
> caused reilloc<rei...@gmail.com> to write:
>
>> On 5/17/2013 8:20 PM, Chris Zakes wrote:
>>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 01:38:17 +0000 (UTC), an orbital mind-control
>>> laser caused danny burstein<dan...@panix.com> to write:
>>>
>>>> In<n4vap8hb70go0rmgh...@4ax.com> Chris Zakes<dont...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Still dodging the question, I see.
>>>>
>>>> Nope. Just giving you the attention, or lack thereof,
>>>> that you deserve.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe maniacal laughter would be better.
>>>
>>> Okay, you've had three chances to answer a simple question, and
>>> haven't done so. Obviously you *can't* answer the question, and
>>> attempting to have an intelligent conversation with you is a waste of
>>> time.
>>
>> He's told you, repeatedly, that your questions are stupid. Why are you
>> not getting the point?
>>
>> LNC
>
> Because I was hoping to have an intelligent conversation. This
> newsgroup is practically dead, and I was hoping to inject a little
> life into it. Obviously, however, he was only interested in trolling.
> (Kind of like your behavior, actually: baseless insults, rather than
> intelligent conversation.)
>
Look at the bright side. At least he said something!
> On Tue, 21 May 2013 15:15:28 -0500, an orbital mind-control laser
> caused reilloc<rei...@gmail.com> to write:
>
>> On 5/17/2013 8:20 PM, Chris Zakes wrote:
>>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 01:38:17 +0000 (UTC), an orbital mind-control
>>> laser caused danny burstein<dan...@panix.com> to write:
>>>
>>>> In<n4vap8hb70go0rmgh...@4ax.com> Chris Zakes<dont...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Still dodging the question, I see.
>>>>
>>>> Nope. Just giving you the attention, or lack thereof,
>>>> that you deserve.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe maniacal laughter would be better.
>>>
>>> Okay, you've had three chances to answer a simple question, and
>>> haven't done so. Obviously you *can't* answer the question, and
>>> attempting to have an intelligent conversation with you is a waste of
>>> time.
>>
>> He's told you, repeatedly, that your questions are stupid. Why are you
>> not getting the point?
>>
>> LNC
>
> Because I was hoping to have an intelligent conversation. This
> newsgroup is practically dead, and I was hoping to inject a little
> life into it. Obviously, however, he was only interested in trolling.
> (Kind of like your behavior, actually: baseless insults, rather than
> intelligent conversation.)
>
--
Tian
http://tian.greens.org
Latest: Pictures from San Jose Bike Party's Safety Ride last Friday.
There is a one world pin on an Arizona quarter in my home now.
Puppet_Sock
May 22, 2013, 12:09:38 PM5/22/13
to
On May 17, 11:00 am, reilloc <reil...@gmail.com> wrote:
[snips]
A consulate that was reporting this for several hours.
A consulate that Obama was listening to the reports live, and went to
bed after hearing them.
A consulate that had been requesting additional security for weeks.
Goddam right he has nothing better to do.
> How about this: we lost a couple of good people in that embassy because
> the President of the United States dropped the ball and didn't focus all
> his attention on the situation;
He didn't drop the ball. He came along, looked carefully at the ball,
and refused to pick it up.
If he had made any effort whatever, even had it failed, I wouldn't be
even slightly upset with him.
> how about what happened back in
> September of 2001. New York City is a lot closer than an embassy in the
> middle east and somebody who was President of the United States...
Chris Zakes adequately dealt with this. You simply insulted him for
it, not making the slightest attempt to answer any part of it.
At some point you will do some self-examination. It won't be pleasant.
> Well, you get what I mean--that is you get what I mean if you understand
> that I mean your bullshit whining and blame laying is bullshit partisan
> drivel.
I see. Requiring a president to make some effort to protect an
ambassador is "bullshit partisan drivel."
Sure.
But now every US ambassador, and every terrorist, and every violent
nut-bar, knows which side of the aisle is buttered.
Socks
[snips]
> The President of the United States has nothing to do but keep an eye on
> one embassy. Next, you'll make the case that the President of the United
> States ought to be keeping an eye on one person and blame him,
> personally, if that guy stubs his toe.
A consulate that was reporting being under rocket grenade attack.
> one embassy. Next, you'll make the case that the President of the United
> States ought to be keeping an eye on one person and blame him,
> personally, if that guy stubs his toe.
A consulate that was reporting this for several hours.
A consulate that Obama was listening to the reports live, and went to
bed after hearing them.
A consulate that had been requesting additional security for weeks.
Goddam right he has nothing better to do.
> How about this: we lost a couple of good people in that embassy because
> the President of the United States dropped the ball and didn't focus all
> his attention on the situation;
and refused to pick it up.
If he had made any effort whatever, even had it failed, I wouldn't be
even slightly upset with him.
> how about what happened back in
> September of 2001. New York City is a lot closer than an embassy in the
> middle east and somebody who was President of the United States...
it, not making the slightest attempt to answer any part of it.
At some point you will do some self-examination. It won't be pleasant.
> Well, you get what I mean--that is you get what I mean if you understand
> that I mean your bullshit whining and blame laying is bullshit partisan
> drivel.
ambassador is "bullshit partisan drivel."
Sure.
But now every US ambassador, and every terrorist, and every violent
nut-bar, knows which side of the aisle is buttered.
Socks
0 new messages