This..is utter bullshit on the Demonrats part and is going to bite them in the ass.

[Gunner Asch]

NPS orders closure of park that receives no federal funding


By Lachlan Markay - Washington Free Beacon

Wednesday, October 2, 2013

The National Park Service has ordered the closure of a Virginia park
that sits on federal land, even though the government provides no
resources for its maintenance or operation.

The Claude Moore Colonial Farm announced on Wednesday that NPS has
ordered it to suspend operations until Congress agrees to a deal to
fund the federal government.

According to Anna Eberly, managing director of the farm, NPS sent law
enforcement agents to the park on Tuesday evening to remove staff and
volunteers from the property.

“You do have to wonder about the wisdom of an organization that would
use staff they don’t have the money to pay to evict visitors from a
park site that operates without costing them any money,” she said.

The park withstood prior government shutdowns, noting in a news
release that the farm will be closed to the public for the first time
in 40 years.

“In previous budget dramas, the Farm has always been exempted since
the NPS provides no staff or resources to operate the Farm,” Eberly
explained in an emailed statement.

“In all the years I have worked with the National Park Service … I
have never worked with a more arrogant, arbitrary and vindictive group
representing the NPS,” Eberly said.

The farm is an historical reenactment site, which “authentically
portrays the life of an 18th Century American family building a life
on the nearer edges of civilized society,” according to its website.

Farm staff repeatedly asked the NPS to allow the farm to remain open.
“Every appeal our Board of Directors made to the NPS administration
was denied,” Eberly said.

She called the decision “utter crap.”

“We have operated the Farm successfully for 32 years after the NPS cut
the Farm from its budget in 1980 and are fully staffed and prepared to
open today. But there are barricades at the Pavilions and entrance to
the Farm,” Eberly explained.

Previous federal funding battles have threatened the farm’s
operations. A group of citizens in 1980 formed the Friends of Turkey
Run Farm, established a $500,000 endowment for the farm, and
negotiated a 30-year no-fee lease.

According to Eberly’s statement, farm staff have been in contact with
Reps. Frank Wolf (R., Va.) and Jim Moran (D., Va.) in an attempt to
reverse NPS’ decision. Neither congressman returned a request for
comment.

News of the farm closure comes as controversy rages over the closure
of the World War II memorial on the National Mall.

WWII veterans in Washington as part of the Honor Flight Network
stormed the memorial on Tuesday, defying NPS, which insisted that the
memorial was legally closed.

More Honor Flight veterans showed up on Wendesday, flanked by members
of Congress from both parties. Republican members blamed Democrats for
the memorial’s closure, and vice versa.

Some speculated that the decision to close the memorial was part of a
concerted effort by the administration to play up the consequences of
the shutdown in an effort to convince congressional Republicans to
agree to a funding bill without preconditions.

• Lachlan Markay is a staff writer for the Washington Free Beacon. His
Twitter handle is @lachlan. His email address is
mar...@freebeacon.com.

Read more:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/2/nps-orders-closure-park-receives-no-federal-fundin/#ixzz2gfcSUU2D
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

"The socialist movement takes great pains to circulate frequently new labels for its ideally constructed state.
Each worn-out label is replaced by another which raises hopes of an ultimate solution of the insoluble basic
problem of Socialism, until it becomes obvious that nothing has been changed but the name.
The most recent slogan is "State Capitalism."[Fascism] It is not commonly realized that this covers nothing more
than what used to be called Planned Economy and State Socialism, and that State Capitalism, Planned Economy,
and State Socialism diverge only in non-essentials from the "classic" ideal of egalitarian Socialism. - Ludwig von Mises (1922)

[Snag]

"Gunner Asch" <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:qf0r499ls3qus7j39...@4ax.com...

>
> NPS orders closure of park that receives no federal funding
>
>
> By Lachlan Markay - Washington Free Beacon
>
> Wednesday, October 2, 2013
>
> The National Park Service has ordered the closure of a Virginia park
> that sits on federal land, even though the government provides no
> resources for its maintenance or operation.
>
> The Claude Moore Colonial Farm announced on Wednesday that NPS has
> ordered it to suspend operations until Congress agrees to a deal to
> fund the federal government.
>

Same kind of bullshit going on here in Stone County Ar . The NPS has
locked up the rifle range that sits on Nat'l Forest land , locked the gates
on the bike trails , closed the local office . A guy that was fishing at the
lake at Blanchard Springs Caverns <also closed> was ordered to leave ,
because "it's closed due to the budget crisis" . That rotten cocksucker in
the White House has gone out of his way to make it hurt the people , when
there was absolutely no need to do so . Bet he hasn't grounded his choppers
and AF1 though - he's just out to hurt the people he's supposed to serve .
What next , martial law because we won't stand for his bullshit ?
It won't surprise me a bit if open season on politicians is declared ...
and it ain't just the dems , it's all of 'em . Bet there are a lot of
current officeholders that ain't gonna get re-elected next time around ...if
there IS a next time .
--
Snag
disgruntled citizen

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Snag" <snag...@msn.com> wrote in message news:Lci3u.15058$dB1....@fx24.iad...

But of course, they should have shut down the FAA, FCC, FBI, and Homeland Security instead.

(rolling eyes)

[BeamMeUpScotty]

> "Snag" <snag...@msn.com> wrote in message news:Lci3u.15058$dB1....@fx24.iad...
>>
>> "Gunner Asch" <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:qf0r499ls3qus7j39...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> NPS orders closure of park that receives no federal funding
>>>
>>>
>>> By Lachlan Markay - Washington Free Beacon
>>>
>>> Wednesday, October 2, 2013
>>>
>>> The National Park Service has ordered the closure of a Virginia park
>>> that sits on federal land, even though the government provides no
>>> resources for its maintenance or operation.
>>>
>>> The Claude Moore Colonial Farm announced on Wednesday that NPS has
>>> ordered it to suspend operations until Congress agrees to a deal to
>>> fund the federal government.
>>>
>>
>> Same kind of bullshit going on here in Stone County Ar . The NPS has
>> locked up the rifle range that sits on Nat'l Forest land , locked the gates
>> on the bike trails , closed the local office . A guy that was fishing at the
>> lake at Blanchard Springs Caverns <also closed> was ordered to leave ,
>> because "it's closed due to the budget crisis" .

You mean Obama has decided to CLOSE NATURE down until government funding
can pay for NATURE to go back to work?

[Snag]

"PrecisionmachinisT" <123mac...@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:p7mdnSArWZgKJNDP...@scnresearch.com...

No , but there is no need to lock up places that do not require anybody to
be there . I mean , why lock the gate on a bike trail ? There is no one
attending the place , it's not patrolled , and it costs NOTHING to leave it
open - and the same applies to the rifle range . I suppose you agree with
closing the WWII memorial too ? This is all intended to punish WE THE PEOPLE
, and we had nothing to do with this bullshit . As I said , I'm betting that
a LOT of incumbents get turned out next go-round .
--
Snag
Pissed Off Citizen

[BeamMeUpScotty]

Maybe start with half the white house housekeeping staff and all of the
EPA......

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Snag" <snag...@msn.com> wrote in message news:tBk3u.13205$T65....@fx13.iad...

The entire park is closed, because there is no staff.

> I suppose you agree with closing the WWII memorial too ?

Why not?

> This is all intended to punish WE THE PEOPLE
> , and we had nothing to do with this bullshit .

Hogwash....

--the Republican party has brought this onto the American people, by electing boneheads who still can't quite seem to come to grips with the fact that Obama was duly elected in 2008, the affordable care act was made into law in 2012 and was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2012, and who, in addition to losing seats in both the house and the senate last November, also lost their bid for the presidency for the second time runnning....

> As I said , I'm betting

You might, if you had any money...

> that a LOT of incumbents get turned out next go-round .

And my bets that again, most of them will be Republicans.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:2al3u.62138$Hr1....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com...

Do you EVER ACTUALLY THINK before opening your fucking cake hole?

http://www.thedailymeal.com/news/white-house-chefs-affected-shutdown/100113

"of the 90 people on the executive residence staff, only 15 people are staying on during the shutdown."

[Frank]

I drew a stand to muzzleload deer hunt Oct 16 on Federal game land here.
Called to find the refuge is closed. Guess I won't get to hunt and they
will keep my $3 application fee too. $3 does not seem like a lot but in
these lotteries rejection rate can be 90% and they charge $10 the day of
the hunt so it is basically self paid for.

You can also bet when this is over those furloughed will get full back pay.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:2al3u.62138$Hr1....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com...
>

> Maybe start with half the white house housekeeping staff and all of the
> EPA......
>

"With the federal government shutdown in its second day, the Environmental Protection Agency is operating without 94 percent of its staff"

http://news.yahoo.com/government-shutdown-halts-epa-air-water-monitoring-163525736--politics.html

[deep]

You're a complete fucking moron.

[deep]

you're a fucking clueless moron. STFU.

[RogerN]

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
news:IbadnVCW1-e3dtDP...@scnresearch.com...

>"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in
>message news:2al3u.62138$Hr1....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com...

<snip>

>>
>>
>> Maybe start with half the white house housekeeping staff
>
>Do you EVER ACTUALLY THINK before opening your fucking cake hole?
>
>http://www.thedailymeal.com/news/white-house-chefs-affected-shutdown/100113
>
>"of the 90 people on the executive residence staff, only 15 people are
>staying on during the shutdown."

So why do they have 90 people when only 15 are considered essential? Why
are there so many "Non-Essential" workers to burden taxpayers and run up
trillion dollar per year debts when they aren't deemed necessary?

Why did Obama send more enforcement to close the WWII memorial than he had
in Benghazi? Why did Obama spend money to close parks that aren't funded by
the government?

The simple answer is that Obama is a piece of shit that knows the idiots
that voted for him are too stupid to believe anything other than what he
tells them. Libtards would gladly eat the corn out of Obama's poop he he
told them to.

You talking about someone not thinking is the pot calling the kettle black.

RogerN

[RogerN]

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
news:VJWdnemh_6atbNDP...@scnresearch.com...

So it's 94% waste, thank you for providing proof that you are the one who
doesn't think.

RogerN

[RogerN]

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
news:U_adnXaxRs7FftDP...@scnresearch.com...

>"Snag" <snag...@msn.com> wrote in message
>news:tBk3u.13205$T65....@fx13.iad...>
>>

<snip>

>> No , but there is no need to lock up places that do not require anybody
>> to
>> be there . I mean , why lock the gate on a bike trail ? There is no one
>> attending the place , it's not patrolled , and it costs NOTHING to leave
>> it
>> open - and the same applies to the rifle range .
>
>The entire park is closed, because there is no staff.

The park in Virginia was staffed by volunteers and donated money, not one
dime came from the Government except to rent barricades and pay people to
close it.

>> I suppose you agree with closing the WWII memorial too ?
>
>Why not?

Because it's in an open area, it costs nothing to leave it open but Obama
sent guards and barricades, spent money, just to close it to make his point.
What was that about people not thinking?

>> This is all intended to punish WE THE PEOPLE
>> , and we had nothing to do with this bullshit .
>
>Hogwash....

To read a micrometer, do you pull your head out of your ass or cram the
micrometer in there with your head?

>--the Republican party has brought this onto the American people, by
>electing boneheads who still can't quite seem to come to grips with the
>fact that Obama was duly elected in 2008, the affordable care act was made
>into >law in 2012 and was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2012, and who, in
>addition to losing seats in both the house and the senate last November,
>also lost their bid for the presidency for the second time runnning....
>
>> As I said , I'm betting
>
>You might, if you had any money...
>
>> that a LOT of incumbents get turned out next go-round .
>
>And my bets that again, most of them will be Republicans.

Perhaps, Obama won 2 elections based on pig-shit stupid morons voting for
him, if they didn't wise up the 2nd time there probably isn't much hope for
them. But the victories of the lefttards are temporary, hell is eternal.

Someday if a queer tells you to suck his cock, you'll do it or be charged
with a hate crime, that's the direction Obama and lefttards have this
country headed. You'll worship Allah or you and your family will be
tortured and murdered, they are getting in through the Mexican border now.

RogerN

[Stormin Mormon]

On 10/3/2013 1:55 PM, Snag wrote:
>

> Same kind of bullshit going on here in Stone County Ar . The NPS has
> locked up the rifle range that sits on Nat'l Forest land , locked the gates
> on the bike trails , closed the local office . A guy that was fishing at the
> lake at Blanchard Springs Caverns <also closed> was ordered to leave ,
> because "it's closed due to the budget crisis" . That rotten cocksucker in
> the White House has gone out of his way to make it hurt the people , when
> there was absolutely no need to do so . Bet he hasn't grounded his choppers
> and AF1 though - he's just out to hurt the people he's supposed to serve .
> What next , martial law because we won't stand for his bullshit ?
> It won't surprise me a bit if open season on politicians is declared ...
> and it ain't just the dems , it's all of 'em . Bet there are a lot of
> current officeholders that ain't gonna get re-elected next time around ...if
> there IS a next time .
> --
> Snag
> disgruntled citizen
>
>

I suspect that most of the low information voters will
blame Bush and the Winger Dingers. After all, that's what
the talking heads keep saying. So, it must be true!


.
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

[Phil Kangas]

"RogerN" <
> wrote in message So why do they have 90 people

> when only 15 are considered essential? Why are
> there so many "Non-Essential" workers to burden
> taxpayers and run up trillion dollar per year
> debts when they aren't deemed necessary?

> RogerN


Here's one way to find out who to get rid of, eih?
;>)}

http://jobmob.co.il/images/articles/funny-layoff-cartoons-comics/dilbert_easiest_round_of_layoffs_ever.png

[Snag]

<deep> wrote in message news:at2s491lbo9j3jqg4...@4ax.com...

Fuck off and die .
--
Snag

[Stormin Mormon]

On 10/3/2013 8:37 PM, RogerN wrote:
>
> Why did Obama send more enforcement to close the WWII memorial than he had
> in Benghazi? Why did Obama spend money to close parks that aren't funded by
> the government?
>
> The simple answer is that Obama is a piece of shit that knows the idiots
> that voted for him are too stupid to believe anything other than what he
> tells them. Libtards would gladly eat the corn out of Obama's poop he he
> told them to.
>
> You talking about someone not thinking is the pot calling the kettle black.
>
> RogerN
>
>

Oh, that's got to hurt. More reinforcement than Benghazi.
And, it's so true. The folks at that compound were
calling for help, for many hours.

Did O blame Benghazi on the Republicans? I can't remember
off hand. Probably so.

[Stormin Mormon]

On 10/3/2013 8:54 PM, RogerN wrote:
>>
>> The entire park is closed, because there is no staff.
>
> The park in Virginia was staffed by volunteers and donated money, not one
> dime came from the Government except to rent barricades and pay people to
> close it.
>
>>> I suppose you agree with closing the WWII memorial too ?
>>
>> Why not?
>
> Because it's in an open area, it costs nothing to leave it open but Obama
> sent guards and barricades, spent money, just to close it to make his point.
> What was that about people not thinking?
>
>

> RogerN
>

Astounding. The federal spending went UP, to close
volunteer run, no cost parks. And we wonder why people
are cynical about government.

[Stormin Mormon]

On 10/3/2013 8:54 PM, RogerN wrote:
>

> Someday if a queer tells you to suck his cock, you'll do it or be charged
> with a hate crime, that's the direction Obama and lefttards have this
> country headed. You'll worship Allah or you and your family will be
> tortured and murdered, they are getting in through the Mexican border now.
>
> RogerN

You figure about the time we either run out of ammo,
or have all the guns confiscated.... that Shariian
Law will be implemented, and we can all either convert
or die?

I do remember hearing some thing about plenty of OTM
(Other Than Mexican) coming across the border. I'd have
to look for stats online, but there are plenty of
Muslims in the USA, at present time.

[Stormin Mormon]

Ah, Usenet. Where quality predominates.

[Stormin Mormon]

Mormons have now been called to run the government.

http://www.thebunyion.com/2013/10/01/lds-church-runs-government-during-shutdown/

LDS Church To Run Government During Shutdown

WASHINGTON - As an answer to the government shutdown
crisis, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints has announced that Church President Thomas
S. Monson met with President Obama today with one
single proposal: “The LDS Church will run the
government during the shutdown.”

[BeamMeUpScotty]

As it should do 100% of the time.

[George Plimpton]

On 10/3/2013 7:48 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>
> NPS orders closure of park that receives no federal funding

You're wrong about which party will be harmed by this. This could well
cause the Republicans to lose their majority in the House in 2014.

[Winston_Smith]

On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 12:55:50 -0500, "Snag" <snag...@msn.com> wrote:

> Same kind of bullshit going on here in Stone County Ar . The NPS has
>locked up the rifle range that sits on Nat'l Forest land , locked the gates
>on the bike trails , closed the local office .

One of our Arizona state roads runs through the Grand Canyon National
Park. It is now closed to through traffic. Their great concession was
that people who live in one of the towns it goes through are allowed
to use it.

It costs zero to leave it open. Any police work required would be
state police. But the FEDs say they can close state roads if they feel
like it.

Arizona tends to vote R, so we can expect more payback if this
deepens.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

Call every trip an emergency.....

A child needs the doctor.....


And old person needs their medicine....


call 911 for food and for ObamaCare.

[Sancho Panza]

On 10/4/2013 11:58 AM, Denny wrote:

> And your prediction of a huge groundswell against Obamacare is a fiction.

Haven't seen any national polls, have you?

[George Plimpton]

On 10/4/2013 8:58 AM, Denny wrote:

> You don't even know what's going on in your own party.

I'm not a Republican; it's not "my" party.


> The Republicans will
> eventually cave on Obamacare. It's a fact. The dozens of Reps that vote for
> a compromise, now and later, will all face extreme Teabag primary
> opposisition Even standard Baggers will face even more extreme baggers.
> Most of the incumbents will have to deal with it. They'll spend all their
> money and all of their dignity in the primaries. The Democrats, on the
> crest of the current wave, will prevail. The Republicans peaked in 2010 and
> now it's receding. This trend will continue.
> Ted Cruz is the worst thing that's happened to the GOP in recent decades.
> And the Republicans have more than a year to screw up other things before
> the election. Thank God for Ted Cruz!

>
> And your prediction of a huge groundswell against Obamacare is a fiction.

I never made such a prediction. You are really sloppy, stupid and
careless. You seem to have mistaken me for someone else. Radical
extremists like you, who stupidly lump all your opponents into one camp,
often do that.

[George Plimpton]

On 10/4/2013 8:58 AM, Denny wrote:
> George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Stormin Mormon" <cayo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:u4w3u.24196$Bi.1...@fx17.iad...

>
> Did O blame Benghazi on the Republicans? I can't remember
> off hand. Probably so.
>

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/10/10/14342096-the-gops-embassy-security-problem?lite

House Republicans cut the administration's request for embassy security funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012.

And:

http://americablog.com/2012/10/gop-cut-half-billion-from-embassy-security-before-libya-attack.html


"But as part of the Republican majority that has controlled the House the last two years, Mr. Issa joined in cutting nearly a half-billion dollars from the State Department's two main security accounts. One covers things like security staffing, including local guards, armored vehicles and security technology; the other, embassy construction and upgrades. In 2011 and 2012, President Obama sought a total of $5 billion, and the House approved $4.5 billion. In 2009, Mr. Issa voted for an amendment that would have cut nearly 300 diplomatic security positions. And the draconian budgets proposed by Mitt Romney's running mate, Representative Paul Ryan, would cut foreign affairs spending by 10 percent in 2013 and even more in 2016."

--but comparing shutting closing the national parks to de-funding embassy security is like comparing apples to oranges, at best.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:QUA3u.72154$Bs1....@en-nntp-02.dc1.easynews.com...

--of course, let businesses "police themselves"...it's always worked so splendidly in the past....

http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Cuyahoga_River_Fire?rec=1642

[BeamMeUpScotty]

Where is ENRON?

WHERE ARE MOST BUSINESSES... THAT LIE AND CHEAT PEOPLE AND STEAL.







> http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Cuyahoga_River_Fire?rec=1642
>

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Stormin Mormon" <cayo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:Y5w3u.24197$Bi.1...@fx17.iad...

> On 10/3/2013 8:54 PM, RogerN wrote:
>>>
>>> The entire park is closed, because there is no staff.
>>
>> The park in Virginia was staffed by volunteers and donated money, not one
>> dime came from the Government except to rent barricades and pay people to
>> close it.
>>
>>>> I suppose you agree with closing the WWII memorial too ?
>>>
>>> Why not?
>>
>> Because it's in an open area, it costs nothing to leave it open but Obama

Oh bullshit, Roger--it costs money to keep it closed, too, just not as much.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 12:08:19 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT"
<123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:

>House Republicans cut the administration's request for embassy
>security funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in
>fiscal 2012.

A lump appropriation. How that is distributed between parts of the
whole is up to the relevant Cabinet agency, in this case the State
Department. There was excess some place, shortages others. There is a
slush account to handle unexpected needs. The Secretary of State had
every authority to allot and change as conditions warranted and
changed. Mrs. Clinton did not do so.

[George Plimpton]

On 10/4/2013 1:16 PM, Denny wrote:

> You mean the one that says 72% blame the Republicans for the shutdown?

I thought you were talking about public opinion about Obamacare? You
were: "And your prediction of a huge groundswell against Obamacare is a
fiction."

In fact, the public *is* generally against the ACA:

Thirty-six percent (36%) of Likely U.S. Voters believe the
government should require every American to buy or obtain health
insurance, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports national
telephone survey. Fifty percent (50%) disagree and oppose the
so-called individual mandate. Fourteen percent (14%) are
undecided.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law


So why did you try to change the subject?

[Stormin Mormon]

So, when the embassy was under attack, I remember hearing
later there were troops and other armed forces who COULD
have responded (like the two brave warriors who did). The
web articles about cut funding don't change the facts that
the embassy asked for help, and help was available. And that
Hillary! and Obama lack of action "Yes, we could have,
but no we didn't" failed to save their lives.

[George Plimpton]

On 10/4/2013 1:59 PM, Bugster, lying racist shitbag *looter*, lied:

> Sancho Panza <otter...@xhotmail.com> wrote in
> news:P0F3u.34300$Xf2....@fx12.iad:
>
>> On 10/4/2013 12:32 PM, Moder@tor wrote:
>>>
>>> Employer mandate: 57% in favor.
>>
>> Not much of a groundswell for the key to the whole shebang--the
>> individual mandate nor the government's so-called "exchanges."
>
> Yet the sign-up websites have been overwhelmed.

No, they haven't. That's what the left-wing media lapdogs were
reporting the first day in California, but it was false.

"California exchange overstated its Web traffic for Obamacare launch"

California's health insurance exchange vastly overstated the number of
online hits it received Tuesday during the rollout of Obamacare.

State officials said the Covered California website got 645,000 hits
during the first day of enrollment, far fewer than the 5 million it
reported Tuesday.

The state exchange had cited the 5 million figure as a sign of strong
consumer interest and a major reason people had so much difficulty using
its $313-million online enrollment system.

Dana Howard, a spokesman for Covered California, said the error was the
result of internal miscommunication.

"Someone misspoke and thought it was indeed 5 million hits. That was
incorrect," he said.

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-california-health-exchange-glitches-20131001,0,7108713.story


"Misspoke" - ha ha ha ha ha! The fucking goddamned left-wing ideologues
simply *LIED*, is what happened.


> --------------------------------------------------------
> Free Malware - Bugster Virusworks www.buggycode.com
> --------------------------------------------------------

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:515u49d5lms9mqrt1...@4ax.com...

> The Secretary of State had
> every authority to allot and change as conditions warranted and
> changed.

The problem with "conditions" is that usually they change with little or no advance warning.

[RogerN]

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
news:xqqdnWPjxfvpqtLP...@scnresearch.com...

That's hilarious, I'll bet you're waiting on Obama to take a dump so you can
have a second helping of corn!

Ok, Let's see, the date 9/11, anniversary of the terrorist attack, was
approaching for how many years? Guess what, I can even predict when 9/11
of 2020 is going to be! And they requested back up for how many
days/weeks/months? Then after the attack, after 7 hours of Obama's
inaction, maybe he was packing for another taxpayer funded vacation, he and
his ilk blame it on a YouTube video even though they had evidence it was a
terrorist attack? Do you want Obama to wash the shit off your corn or do
you want to eat it as is? Your head's so far up your ass you should never
need a colonoscopy, maybe you need a flashlight?

RogerN

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Stumped Moron" <cayo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:b0G3u.4436$Mj2....@fx25.iad...

Sorry, but we do not have the authority to invade other countries with our military troops any time a riot happens to break out.

> have responded (like the two brave warriors who did). The
> web articles about cut funding don't change the facts that
> the embassy asked for help, and help was available.

Last I heard, help in the form of additional security was indeed offered (By General Ham) , but for reasons still unclear, Stevens either declined or did not follow through on the offer.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/report-stevens-declined-security-91406.html

> And that
> Hillary! and Obama lack of action "Yes, we could have,
> but no we didn't" failed to save their lives.
>

http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/benghazi.asp


On 1 November 2012, U.S. intelligence officials released an account stating the CIA had in fact rushed security operatives to the U.S. mission compound in Benghazi within half an hour of the start of the attack:


The CIA rushed security operatives to an American diplomatic compound in Libya within 25 minutes after it had come under attack and played a more central role in the effort to fend off a night-long siege than has been publicly acknowledged, U.S. intelligence officials said.

The agency mobilized the evacuation effort, took control of an unarmed U.S. military drone to map possible escape routes, dispatched an emergency security team from Tripoli, the capital, and chartered aircraft that ultimately carried surviving U.S. personnel to safety on Sept. 12,U.S. officials said.

U.S. intelligence officials insisted that CIA operatives in Benghazi and Tripoli made decisions rapidly throughout the assault with no interference from Washington, even while acknowledging that CIA security forces were badly outmatched and largely unable to mobilize Libyan security teams until it was too late.

Among the new disclosures is that the CIA station chief in Tripoli sent an emergency security force, with about a half-dozen agency operatives as well as two U.S. military personnel, to Benghazi aboard a hastily chartered aircraft while the attack was underway.

The CIA team attempted to organize an effort to make its way to a hospital where U.S. Ambassador. Christopher Stevens had been taken and was thought to be still alive. But the team was held up by Libyan officials at the airport and scrapped the plan to reach Stevens after learning that the security situation at the hospital was uncertain.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 14:47:27 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>"Winston_Smith" wrote

>
>> The Secretary of State had
>> every authority to allot and change as conditions warranted and
>> changed.
>
>The problem with "conditions" is that usually they change with little or no advance warning.

And how is it then the fault of Republican appropriations made months
and years earlier. My, how the left loves to wiggle out of all
responsibility.



There was intelligence about the attack well in advance, ignored as
usual. There was a call for assistance. There was assistance
available. Obama and Clinton did nothing. Actually there were orders
not to assist. People died. That is the fault of Republicans.

Obama and Clinton lied about all that saying it was just a little
demonstration over an obscure movie no one had ever heard of and not a
well planned terrorist attack. They stonewalled it until the truth was
rammed up their ying-yangs. That is the Republican's fault.

There was intelligence long in advance of the Fort Hood shooting about
the increasing radicalization and mental instability of one of Obama's
Muslim brothers. It was ignored. That is the Republican's fault.

Even after he went nuts, butchering innocents, shouting Allah is
Great, Obama still manages to deny it was a terrorist attack. No, just
a little case of workplace violence.

Thereby Obama neatly screws all the soldier and police victims of the
non-terrorist attack by his Muslim brother out of the benefits they
would get if he had the cahonies to call it terrorism. That is the
Republicans fault.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:VxE3u.54933$Rr1....@en-nntp-08.dc1.easynews.com...

> On 10/4/2013 3:13 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
>>
>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:QUA3u.72154$Bs1....@en-nntp-02.dc1.easynews.com...
>>> On 10/3/2013 6:35 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:2al3u.62138$Hr1....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe start with half the white house housekeeping staff and all of the
>>>>> EPA......
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "With the federal government shutdown in its second day, the Environmental Protection Agency is operating without 94 percent of its staff"
>>>>
>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/government-shutdown-halts-epa-air-water-monitoring-163525736--politics.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>> As it should do 100% of the time.
>>>
>>
>> --of course, let businesses "police themselves"...it's always worked so splendidly in the past....
>>
>
> Where is ENRON?
>

Enron swindled a whole lot of innocent people, due to the lack of government oversight.

> WHERE ARE MOST BUSINESSES... THAT LIE AND CHEAT PEOPLE AND STEAL.

Like Enron, most of them remain in business until they are finally caught...

--sadly, by then the damage is already done.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 15:25:36 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT"
<123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:


Boy, I hope your machining is more precise than your logic or your
clients are in sad shape.

>Sorry, but we do not have the authority to invade other countries
>with our military troops any time a riot happens to break out.

Sorry, but an embassy is considered the property of the nation
represented.

Sorry, but we have a right to defend our own citizens in our own
property unless Obama gives away security responsibility to the host
nation as a show of his love and trust. Which Obama did. That is the
Republicans fault.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 14:47:27 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>> "Winston_Smith" wrote
>>
>>> The Secretary of State had
>>> every authority to allot and change as conditions warranted and
>>> changed.
>>
>> The problem with "conditions" is that usually they change with little or no advance warning.

Probably why we try to put smart people that are QUALIFIED in those
positions rather than putting useless bags of skin like Democrats in them.


NEITHER HILLARY OR OBAMA WERE QUALIFIED OR COMPETENT ENOUGH FOR THE JOB,
AND IT COST GOOD PEOPLE THEIR LIVES.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

On 10/4/2013 6:36 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
>
> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:VxE3u.54933$Rr1....@en-nntp-08.dc1.easynews.com...
>> On 10/4/2013 3:13 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
>>>
>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:QUA3u.72154$Bs1....@en-nntp-02.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>> On 10/3/2013 6:35 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:2al3u.62138$Hr1....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe start with half the white house housekeeping staff and all of the
>>>>>> EPA......
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "With the federal government shutdown in its second day, the Environmental Protection Agency is operating without 94 percent of its staff"
>>>>>
>>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/government-shutdown-halts-epa-air-water-monitoring-163525736--politics.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> As it should do 100% of the time.
>>>>
>>>
>>> --of course, let businesses "police themselves"...it's always worked so splendidly in the past....
>>>
>>
>> Where is ENRON?
>>
>
> Enron swindled a whole lot of innocent people, due to the lack of government oversight.
>

AND WENT OUT OF BUSINESS.

>> WHERE ARE MOST BUSINESSES... THAT LIE AND CHEAT PEOPLE AND STEAL.
>
> Like Enron, most of them remain in business until they are finally caught...
>
> --sadly, by then the damage is already done.

AND GOVERNMENT NEVER SWINDLES ANYONE?

>

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:qrfu499iq0fcgj1ll...@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 14:47:27 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>
>>> The Secretary of State had
>>> every authority to allot and change as conditions warranted and
>>> changed.
>>
>>The problem with "conditions" is that usually they change with little or no advance warning.
>
> And how is it then the fault of Republican appropriations made months
> and years earlier. My, how the left loves to wiggle out of all
> responsibility.
>

When five people have five umbrellas amoungst themselves and then someone takes away two of them, who's fault is it when two people get wet?

>
>
> There was intelligence about the attack well in advance, ignored as

Hogwash.

> usual. There was a call for assistance. There was assistance
> available. Obama and Clinton did nothing. Actually there were orders
> not to assist. People died. That is the fault of Republicans.
>
> Obama and Clinton lied about all that saying it was just a little
> demonstration over an obscure movie no one had ever heard of and not a

All available information suggests that to the vast majority of participants, it was indeed over an obscure movie.

> well planned terrorist attack. They stonewalled it until the truth was
> rammed up their ying-yangs. That is the Republican's fault.

Obama called it a terrorist act the very next day, while speaking in in the white house garden.

> There was intelligence long in advance of the Fort Hood shooting about
> the increasing radicalization and mental instability of one of Obama's

Of course, we need to arrest anyone that displays "mental instability"....

> Muslim brothers. It was ignored. That is the Republican's fault.
>
> Even after he went nuts, butchering innocents, shouting Allah is
> Great, Obama still manages to deny it was a terrorist attack.

The problem is his intent.....(B) I, II, and III....


18 USC § 2331

(5) the term "domestic terrorism" means activities that-
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended-
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

> No, just
> a little case of workplace violence.

No, just another mass killing, carried out by deranged individual.

> Thereby Obama neatly screws all the soldier and police victims of the
> non-terrorist attack by his Muslim brother out of the benefits they

His Muslim brother?

> would get if he had the cahonies to call it terrorism. That is the
> Republicans fault.

KooK

[Winston_Smith]

On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 14:36:22 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:

>--the Republican party has brought this onto the American people,
>by electing boneheads who still can't quite seem to come to grips

I realize hardcore leftists don't think this way, but they were
elected by the people - not by the party. In most cases, they beat out
party candidates in primaries. People who one by one trudged to the
polls and made a choice. You know, the people, or what you call
sheeple. Prolies.

>with the fact that Obama was duly elected in 2008,

You seem to be incapable of coming to grips that the House was elected
as it is specifically because the people didn't like what they got in
ObamaCare once Ds had rammed it though so we could see what was in it.
They elected people who promised to repeal or defund ObamaCare.

>the affordable care act was

Classic legislative lie. It is far from affordable. It is simply a D
mandate that everyone buy something they don't want and can't afford
from one of the many private insurance companies that funded the Ds
campaigns.

>made into law in 2012 and was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2012,

Not quite. Obama spend years telling us it was not a tax. It was a
"mandate". The Supreme Court said then it was unconstitutional because
you can not mandate that some one must make a purchase. What they did
say was if it was a tax, then it could squeak by under a clause that
has long been abused.

Obama's lawyers in court said OK, great, it's a tax. While Obama and
the D echo chamber keep saying it's not a tax.

>and who, in addition to losing seats in both the house
>and the senate last November,

Huh. Ds controlled both houses when ObamaCare passed. Once the public
got a whiff of what it was, they handed the budget making authority,
the House, over to the Rs you are bitching so much about.

>also lost their bid for the presidency for the second time runnning

The moron that gave Obama the model for ObamaCare and his word for
selling it - mandate. And chose not to run for a second term as
governor of a very liberal state because he was going to get his ass
whooped because of RomneyCare.

That just shows that idiocy runs in both parties. And that the public
does not want ObamaCare no matter what color the wrapping on the
Christmas present is.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

On 10/4/2013 7:05 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
>
> "Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:qrfu499iq0fcgj1ll...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 14:47:27 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>> "Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>
>>>> The Secretary of State had
>>>> every authority to allot and change as conditions warranted and
>>>> changed.
>>>
>>> The problem with "conditions" is that usually they change with little or no advance warning.
>>
>> And how is it then the fault of Republican appropriations made months
>> and years earlier. My, how the left loves to wiggle out of all
>> responsibility.
>>
>
> When five people have five umbrellas amoungst themselves and then someone takes away two of them, who's fault is it when two people get wet?
>

Since when is it the responsibility of someone else to make sure you
stay dry?

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 16:05:26 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 14:47:27 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>
>>>> The Secretary of State had
>>>> every authority to allot and change as conditions warranted and
>>>> changed.
>>>
>>>The problem with "conditions" is that usually they change with little or no advance warning.
>>
>> And how is it then the fault of Republican appropriations made months
>> and years earlier. My, how the left loves to wiggle out of all
>> responsibility.
>>
>
>When five people have five umbrellas amoungst themselves and then someone takes away two of them, who's fault is it when two people get wet?

Clinton for not shipping the umbrellas stored elsewhere. For denying
permission for anyone to respond with AR unbrellas. And then for
telling us for a couple months that it never rained.

>> There was intelligence about the attack well in advance, ignored as
>
>Hogwash.
>
>> usual. There was a call for assistance. There was assistance
>> available. Obama and Clinton did nothing. Actually there were orders
>> not to assist. People died. That is the fault of Republicans.
>>
>> Obama and Clinton lied about all that saying it was just a little
>> demonstration over an obscure movie no one had ever heard of and not a
>
>All available information suggests that to the vast majority of participants, it was indeed over an obscure movie.

Hogwash.

>> well planned terrorist attack. They stonewalled it until the truth was
>> rammed up their ying-yangs. That is the Republican's fault.
>
>Obama called it a terrorist act the very next day, while speaking in in the white house garden.

Hogwash.

>
>> There was intelligence long in advance of the Fort Hood shooting about
>> the increasing radicalization and mental instability of one of Obama's
>
>Of course, we need to arrest anyone that displays "mental instability"....

You might take away their guns. You might give them mental treatment
instead of denying the truth and shipping them from base to base to be
someone else's problem.

>> Muslim brothers. It was ignored. That is the Republican's fault.
>>
>> Even after he went nuts, butchering innocents, shouting Allah is
>> Great, Obama still manages to deny it was a terrorist attack.
>
>The problem is his intent.....(B) I, II, and III....

The problem is Obama.

>
>18 USC § 2331
>
>(5) the term "domestic terrorism" means activities that-
>(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
>(B) appear to be intended-
>(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
>(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
>(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
>
>> No, just
>> a little case of workplace violence.
>
>No, just another mass killing, carried out by deranged individual.

No. By a Muslim. By someone active in radical activities. By someone
that posted terrorist intentions. By someone shouting Allah is great
while on his shooting spree. Intentional, planned terrorism, not
someone pissed over his last raise.

>> Thereby Obama neatly screws all the soldier and police victims of the
>> non-terrorist attack by his Muslim brother out of the benefits they
>
>His Muslim brother?

Are not all men our brothers. One big Muslim Brotherhood.

>> would get if he had the cahonies to call it terrorism. That is the
>> Republicans fault.
>
>KooK

To the extreme left, yeah I suppose that's how you see it.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:ZuH3u.16745$Tp1....@en-nntp-06.dc1.easynews.com...

22 January 2002:
Calcutta, India. Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami gunmen attack Consulate, 5 dead

14 June 2002:
Karachi, Pakistan. Al-Qaeda truck bomb detonates outside Consulate, killing 12

28 February 2003:
Islamabad, Pakistan. Unknown gunmen attack Embassy, 2 deaths.

30 June 2004:
Tashkent, Uzbekistan. Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan suicide bomber attacks Embassy, killing 2

6 December 2004:
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al-Qaeda gunmen raid diplomatic compound, 9 dead

2 March 2006:
Karachi, Pakistan. Car bomb explodes outside Consulate, killing 2

12 September 2006:
Damascus, Syria. Gunmen raid US Embassy, killing 4

18 March 2008:
Sana'a, Yemen. Mortar attack against US Embassy, 2 deaths

9 July 2008:
Istanbul, Turkey. Armed attack against Consulate, 6 people are killed

17 September 2008:
Sana'a, Yemen. Two car bombs explode outside US embassy in Yemeni capital, killing 16

5 April 2010:
Peshawar, Pakistan. An attack near the U.S. Consulate kills two consulate security guards and at least six others.

11 September 2012:
Republicans become enraged when a group of terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, killing the U.S. Ambassador and three others.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:5igu49149u651t4e9...@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 15:25:36 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT"
> <123mac...@notmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Boy, I hope your machining is more precise than your logic or your
> clients are in sad shape.
>
>>Sorry, but we do not have the authority to invade other countries
>>with our military troops any time a riot happens to break out.
>
> Sorry, but an embassy is considered the property of the nation
> represented.
>

Sorry, but under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the host country is responsible for security of embassies.

> Sorry, but we have a right to defend our own citizens in our own
> property unless Obama gives away security responsibility to the host

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Diplomatic_Relations#Summary_of_provisions

"Article 22. The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an embassy, are inviolate and must not be entered by the host country except by permission of the head of the mission. Furthermore, the host country must protect the mission from intrusion or damage. The host country must never search the premises, nor seize its documents or property. Article 30 extends this provision to the private residence of the diplomats."

> nation as a show of his love and trust. Which Obama did.

Obama signed the Vienna Convention?

> That is the Republicans fault.

KooK

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:0xH3u.16746$Tp1....@en-nntp-06.dc1.easynews.com...

> On 10/4/2013 6:36 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
>>
>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:VxE3u.54933$Rr1....@en-nntp-08.dc1.easynews.com...
>>> On 10/4/2013 3:13 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:QUA3u.72154$Bs1....@en-nntp-02.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>>> On 10/3/2013 6:35 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:2al3u.62138$Hr1....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe start with half the white house housekeeping staff and all of the
>>>>>>> EPA......
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "With the federal government shutdown in its second day, the Environmental Protection Agency is operating without 94 percent of its staff"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/government-shutdown-halts-epa-air-water-monitoring-163525736--politics.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> As it should do 100% of the time.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --of course, let businesses "police themselves"...it's always worked so splendidly in the past....
>>>>
>>>
>>> Where is ENRON?
>>>
>>
>> Enron swindled a whole lot of innocent people, due to the lack of government oversight.
>>
>
> AND WENT OUT OF BUSINESS.
>

And several were jailed.

>>> WHERE ARE MOST BUSINESSES... THAT LIE AND CHEAT PEOPLE AND STEAL.
>>
>> Like Enron, most of them remain in business until they are finally caught...
>>
>> --sadly, by then the damage is already done.
>
> AND GOVERNMENT NEVER SWINDLES ANYONE?

Nope, it'll never happen.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in message news:d4I3u.84412$gp1....@en-nntp-16.dc1.easynews.com...

Since when is it Obama's responsiblility to try and guess which US Ambassador might not need an umbrella tomorrow afternoon?

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:56ju499u9fcn6qh0n...@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 16:05:26 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 14:47:27 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>>
>>>>> The Secretary of State had
>>>>> every authority to allot and change as conditions warranted and
>>>>> changed.
>>>>
>>>>The problem with "conditions" is that usually they change with little or no advance warning.
>>>
>>> And how is it then the fault of Republican appropriations made months
>>> and years earlier. My, how the left loves to wiggle out of all
>>> responsibility.
>>>
>>
>>When five people have five umbrellas amoungst themselves and then someone takes away two of them, who's fault is it when two people get wet?
>
> Clinton for not shipping the umbrellas stored elsewhere. For denying

Since when is it Obama's responsiblility to try and guess which US Ambassador might not need an umbrella tomorrow afternoon?

> permission for anyone to respond with AR unbrellas. And then for

I've already told you, we don't have authortiy to do that, under the Vienna convention.

> telling us for a couple months that it never rained.

Fabrication.

>>> There was intelligence about the attack well in advance, ignored as
>>
>>Hogwash.
>>> usual. There was a call for assistance. There was assistance
>>> available. Obama and Clinton did nothing. Actually there were orders
>>> not to assist. People died. That is the fault of Republicans.
>>>
>>> Obama and Clinton lied about all that saying it was just a little
>>> demonstration over an obscure movie no one had ever heard of and not a
>>
>>All available information suggests that to the vast majority of participants, it was indeed over an obscure movie.
>
> Hogwash.

Briilliant counter arguement...

>>> well planned terrorist attack. They stonewalled it until the truth was
>>> rammed up their ying-yangs. That is the Republican's fault.
>>
>>Obama called it a terrorist act the very next day, while speaking in in the white house garden.
>
> Hogwash.

And yet another...

>>> There was intelligence long in advance of the Fort Hood shooting about
>>> the increasing radicalization and mental instability of one of Obama's
>>
>>Of course, we need to arrest anyone that displays "mental instability"....
>
> You might take away their guns. You might give them mental treatment
> instead of denying the truth and shipping them from base to base to be
> someone else's problem.

Unfortunately, Republicans won't consider anything of the sort.

>>> Muslim brothers. It was ignored. That is the Republican's fault.
>>>
>>> Even after he went nuts, butchering innocents, shouting Allah is
>>> Great, Obama still manages to deny it was a terrorist attack.
>>
>>The problem is his intent.....(B) I, II, and III....
>
> The problem is Obama.
>>
>>18 USC § 2331
>>
>>(5) the term "domestic terrorism" means activities that-
>>(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
>>(B) appear to be intended-
>>(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
>>(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
>>(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
>>
>>> No, just
>>> a little case of workplace violence.
>>
>>No, just another mass killing, carried out by deranged individual.
>
> No. By a Muslim. By someone active in radical activities. By someone
> that posted terrorist intentions. By someone shouting Allah is great
> while on his shooting spree. Intentional, planned terrorism, not
> someone pissed over his last raise.

Sorry, religion does not factor in the definition of the word "terrorist"

>>> Thereby Obama neatly screws all the soldier and police victims of the
>>> non-terrorist attack by his Muslim brother out of the benefits they
>>
>>His Muslim brother?
>
> Are not all men our brothers. One big Muslim Brotherhood.

Speak for yourself.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 16:48:17 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>"Winston_Smith" wrote

>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 15:25:36 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT"wrote:
>>
>>>Sorry, but we do not have the authority to invade other countries
>>>with our military troops any time a riot happens to break out.
>>
>> Sorry, but an embassy is considered the property of the nation
>> represented.
>
>Sorry, but under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the host country is responsible for security of embassies.

Of the embassy - the building. Not of the personnel. Not of internal
security.

>> Sorry, but we have a right to defend our own citizens in our own
>> property unless Obama gives away security responsibility to the host
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Diplomatic_Relations#Summary_of_provisions
>"Article 22. The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an embassy, are inviolate and must not be entered by the host country except by permission of the head of the mission. Furthermore, the host country must protect the mission from intrusion or damage. The host country must never search the premises, nor seize its documents or property. Article 30 extends this provision to the private residence of the diplomats."

Nicely spun. The host country provides security around the embassy.
Your cite says they "must not be entered by the host country", so
internal security must be provided by the represented nation.

Most embassies have some members of the military on the premises for
internal security.

That's what the comedy team of Obama and Clinton screwed up.

No umbrellas and then their bogus claim it had never rained.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:q0iu495dt5keb919s...@4ax.com...

> On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 14:36:22 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>
>>--the Republican party has brought this onto the American people,
>>by electing boneheads who still can't quite seem to come to grips
>
> I realize hardcore leftists don't think this way, but they were
> elected by the people - not by the party. In most cases, they beat out
> party candidates in primaries. People who one by one trudged to the
> polls and made a choice. You know, the people, or what you call
> sheeple. Prolies.
>

The fact remains, they are Republicans.

>>with the fact that Obama was duly elected in 2008,
>
> You seem to be incapable of coming to grips that the House was elected
> as it is specifically because the people didn't like what they got in
> ObamaCare

Obamacare was signed into law on March 23, 2010; the Tea party platform was at that time (and still is today) mostly based on "lower taxes and less government spending".

> once Ds had rammed it though so we could see what was in it.
> They elected people who promised to repeal or defund ObamaCare.

And they've failed miserably, despite trying incessantly.

>>the affordable care act was
>
> Classic legislative lie. It is far from affordable. It is simply a D
> mandate that everyone buy something they don't want and can't afford
> from one of the many private insurance companies that funded the Ds
> campaigns.
>

>>made into law in 2010 and was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2012,

>
> Not quite. Obama spend years telling us it was not a tax. It was a
> "mandate". The Supreme Court said then it was unconstitutional because
> you can not mandate that some one must make a purchase. What they did
> say was if it was a tax, then it could squeak by under a clause that
> has long been abused.
>
> Obama's lawyers in court said OK, great, it's a tax. While Obama and
> the D echo chamber keep saying it's not a tax.
>

Deflect all you want, but the fact remains, it's indeed been upheld by the Supreme Court.

>>and who, in addition to losing seats in both the house
>>and the senate last November,
>
> Huh. Ds controlled both houses when ObamaCare passed. Once the public
> got a whiff of what it was, they handed the budget making authority,
> the House,

Which then turned around lost several of the seats it had gained during this last mid term election...

> over to the Rs you are bitching so much about.

>>also lost their bid for the presidency for the second time runnning
>
> The moron that gave Obama the model for ObamaCare and his word for
> selling it - mandate. And chose not to run for a second term as
> governor of a very liberal state because he was going to get his ass
> whooped because of RomneyCare.
>
> That just shows that idiocy runs in both parties. And that the public

Speak for yourself, you do not represent "the public"....

My insurance plan from Lifewise is going to be about $100.00 a month cheaper than it used to be, starting in January...

But I think we're going to pay about ten dollars more per month instead and sign up with Kaiser, the deductible would be $1000 per year instead of the current $2500 and no more worries about "approved providers" and "out of network fees", etc. Last time I checked with Kaiser was several years ago and the plan was about twice the cost.

What this all tells me is that historically, the insurance industry has been shifting costs onto smaller groups in order to keep subscribers from places like Boeing and similar large institutions on board.

And so if YOUR insurance goes up because of Obamacare, I'm happy--because it means that I'm no longer being forced to pay for YOUR goddamned health care.

> does not want ObamaCare no matter what color the wrapping on the
> Christmas present is.

Of course, THAT explains perfectly why the servers are having so much trouble keeping up with the internet traffic...

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message news:2pmu49dmgt7itqkfn...@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 16:48:17 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 15:25:36 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT"wrote:
>>>
>>>>Sorry, but we do not have the authority to invade other countries
>>>>with our military troops any time a riot happens to break out.
>>>
>>> Sorry, but an embassy is considered the property of the nation
>>> represented.
>>
>>Sorry, but under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the host country is responsible for security of embassies.
>
> Of the embassy - the building. Not of the personnel. Not of internal
> security.
>
>>> Sorry, but we have a right to defend our own citizens in our own
>>> property unless Obama gives away security responsibility to the host
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Diplomatic_Relations#Summary_of_provisions
>>"Article 22. The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an embassy, are inviolate and must not be entered by the host country except by permission of the head of the mission. Furthermore, the host country must protect the mission from intrusion or damage. The host country must never search the premises, nor seize its documents or property. Article 30 extends this provision to the private residence of the diplomats."
>
> Nicely spun. The host country provides security around the embassy.

No "spin", it's just the way it it...

> Your cite says they "must not be entered by the host country", so

So, you're saying the attack came from inside the embassy?

> internal security must be provided by the represented nation.
>

"The secondary mission of Marine Security Guards is to provide protection for U.S. citizens and U.S. Government property located within designated U.S. Diplomatic and Consular premises during exigent circumstances, which require immediate aid or action"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Security_Guard#Responsibilities

>
> Most embassies have some members of the military on the premises for
> internal security.
>
> That's what the comedy team of Obama and Clinton screwed up.
>
> No umbrellas

Republicans forgot to pay the umbrella man...

> and then their bogus claim it had never rained.

Romoney said that too, during the debates...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZV9xLPWOPs

[jon_banquer]

Stay as far away from Kaiser Permanente as you can. They kill people. They are totally no good and they will nickel and dime you to death.

This is the kind of Republican that Arizona elects. Barry Goldwater must be spinning in his grave. It's long past time for this guy to go yet he wins in landslides every time an election is held. It's really sad:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/02/arizona-sheriff-joe-arpaio-independent-monitor

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 17:21:07 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 14:47:27 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>> The Secretary of State had
>>>>>> every authority to allot and change as conditions warranted and
>>>>>> changed.
>>>>>
>>>>>The problem with "conditions" is that usually they change with little or no advance warning.
>>>>
>>>> And how is it then the fault of Republican appropriations made months
>>>> and years earlier. My, how the left loves to wiggle out of all
>>>> responsibility.
>>>
>>>When five people have five umbrellas amoungst themselves and then someone takes away two of them, who's fault is it when two people get wet?
>>
>> Clinton for not shipping the umbrellas stored elsewhere. For denying
>
>Since when is it Obama's responsiblility to try and guess which US Ambassador might not need an umbrella tomorrow afternoon?

Unless you can identify a source of infinite funds, it comes with the
job. That might be one definition of "competent". And he is not. And
his buddy Clinton is not.

You also conveniently over look that security experts were complaining
about the danger before anything happened, but Obama didn't want to
appear not to trust his Muslim brothers. He was wrong. People died.
The Republicans are respoinsible for that - if you do have to go back
two years to find you weasle opening.

>> permission for anyone to respond with AR unbrellas. And then for
>
>I've already told you, we don't have authortiy to do that, under the Vienna convention.

Yes, you have. And you are wrong. If you were right, is it better
that our people die than we get Vienna unhappy?

>>>All available information suggests that to the vast majority of participants, it was indeed over an obscure movie.
>>
>> Hogwash.
>
>Briilliant counter arguement...

Glad you like it. It's yours every time you are face with an
inconvenient truth you don't know how to weasle out og.

>
>>>> well planned terrorist attack. They stonewalled it until the truth was
>>>> rammed up their ying-yangs. That is the Republican's fault.
>>>
>>>Obama called it a terrorist act the very next day, while speaking in in the white house garden.
>>
>> Hogwash.
>
>And yet another...

Still yours.

>
>>>> There was intelligence long in advance of the Fort Hood shooting about
>>>> the increasing radicalization and mental instability of one of Obama's
>>>
>>>Of course, we need to arrest anyone that displays "mental instability"....
>>
>> You might take away their guns. You might give them mental treatment
>> instead of denying the truth and shipping them from base to base to be
>> someone else's problem.
>
>Unfortunately, Republicans won't consider anything of the sort.

Boy, you are whacko. Not taking guns from everyone is not the same
thing as taking guns from a miltiary person, on a military base, who
is identified as an extremist Muslim, who is identified as a potential
terrorist, who is identified as having mental problems, who is himself
not a potential combatant but a doctor of sorts and unlikely to be
called to armed combat.

>>>> Muslim brothers. It was ignored. That is the Republican's fault.
>>>>
>>>> Even after he went nuts, butchering innocents, shouting Allah is
>>>> Great, Obama still manages to deny it was a terrorist attack.
>>>
>>>The problem is his intent.....(B) I, II, and III....
>>
>> The problem is Obama.
>>>
>>>18 USC § 2331
>>>
>>>(5) the term "domestic terrorism" means activities that-
>>>(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
>>>(B) appear to be intended-
>>>(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
>>>(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
>>>(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
>>>
>>>> No, just
>>>> a little case of workplace violence.
>>>
>>>No, just another mass killing, carried out by deranged individual.
>>
>> No. By a Muslim. By someone active in radical activities. By someone
>> that posted terrorist intentions. By someone shouting Allah is great
>> while on his shooting spree. Intentional, planned terrorism, not
>> someone pissed over his last raise.
>
>Sorry, religion does not factor in the definition of the word "terrorist"

Hogwash. Terrorists have motives. Religion is one of the big ones.

It comes with a few percent. You confuse "all Muslims are terrorists"
with "most terrorists are Muslim".

>>>> Thereby Obama neatly screws all the soldier and police victims of the
>>>> non-terrorist attack by his Muslim brother out of the benefits they
>>>
>>>His Muslim brother?
>>
>> Are not all men our brothers. One big Muslim Brotherhood.
>
>Speak for yourself.

No campfire? No kumbaya then? Some liberal appoligist you are.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 18:16:32 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>"Winston_Smith" wrote

>> On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 14:36:22 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>
>>>--the Republican party has brought this onto the American people,
>>>by electing boneheads who still can't quite seem to come to grips
>>
>> I realize hardcore leftists don't think this way, but they were
>> elected by the people - not by the party. In most cases, they beat out
>> party candidates in primaries. People who one by one trudged to the
>> polls and made a choice. You know, the people, or what you call
>> sheeple. Prolies.
>
>The fact remains, they are Republicans.

Weasel, weasel, toil and tweezel. They voted for an R this time. No
one says they belong to the party. Most people that vote for one party
or the other do not consider themselves members. They certain have no
voice in party doings even if they do consider themselves members.

Most party candidates were defeated at the primary, so the party had
little to do with picking candidates.

You wrote "the Republican party has ..." Now you say it's not the
actual party but every Joe Sixpack that cast a vote for an R in one
election.

Well, here is a hint. Then they ARE the majority of the voters. You
are joining Michelle in saying America is evil.

>>>with the fact that Obama was duly elected in 2008,
>>
>> You seem to be incapable of coming to grips that the House was elected
>> as it is specifically because the people didn't like what they got in
>> ObamaCare
>
>Obamacare was signed into law on March 23, 2010; the Tea party platform was at that time (and still is today) mostly based on "lower taxes and less government spending".

Yeah? And?

Are they bad things?

>> once Ds had rammed it though so we could see what was in it.
>> They elected people who promised to repeal or defund ObamaCare.
>
>And they've failed miserably, despite trying incessantly.

Then why are you here whining that they aren't playing ball with you?

>>>the affordable care act was
>>
>> Classic legislative lie. It is far from affordable. It is simply a D
>> mandate that everyone buy something they don't want and can't afford
>> from one of the many private insurance companies that funded the Ds
>> campaigns.
>>
>>>made into law in 2010 and was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2012,
>>
>> Not quite. Obama spend years telling us it was not a tax. It was a
>> "mandate". The Supreme Court said then it was unconstitutional because
>> you can not mandate that some one must make a purchase. What they did
>> say was if it was a tax, then it could squeak by under a clause that
>> has long been abused.
>>
>> Obama's lawyers in court said OK, great, it's a tax. While Obama and
>> the D echo chamber keep saying it's not a tax.
>
>Deflect all you want, but the fact remains, it's indeed been upheld by the Supreme Court.

On one technical point. And, most important, not by the higher court,
the voters. POTUS said you can do it. They did not say you must do it.
They did not say anyone wanted it. They just said if Obama gave up his
lie of saying a new tax was a "mandate", then he could squeak by. They
ruled on no other issue in the entire, complex mess.

They certainly never said it can't be repelled. They certainly never
said Congress has to fund it.

>>>and who, in addition to losing seats in both the house
>>>and the senate last November,
>>
>> Huh. Ds controlled both houses when ObamaCare passed. Once the public
>> got a whiff of what it was, they handed the budget making authority,
>> the House,
>
>Which then turned around lost several of the seats it had gained during this last mid term election...

"Midterm elections in the United States refer to general elections in
the United States that are held two years after the quadrennial
(four-year) elections for the ..".

ObamaCare was enacted in 2010. The presidential election was in 2012.
The first mid term election will be next year. But you are telling us
the Rs lost (past tense) seats in it ?????

Stop making things up. You aren't up to keep your lies organized.

>> over to the Rs you are bitching so much about.
>
>>>also lost their bid for the presidency for the second time runnning
>>
>> The moron that gave Obama the model for ObamaCare and his word for
>> selling it - mandate. And chose not to run for a second term as
>> governor of a very liberal state because he was going to get his ass
>> whooped because of RomneyCare.
>>
>> That just shows that idiocy runs in both parties. And that the public

>Speak for yourself, you do not represent "the public"....

Nor do you. Liberals seem to always miss that point.

The public did speak when they rejected "I love mandates" RomneyCare
and put in anti-ObamaCare Representatives. It's not my opinion; I'm
just reporting history.

>My insurance plan from Lifewise is going to be about $100.00 a month cheaper than it used to be, starting in January...

>But I think we're going to pay about ten dollars more per month instead and sign up with Kaiser, the deductible would be $1000 per year instead of the current $2500 and no more worries about "approved providers" and "out of network fees", etc. Last time I checked with Kaiser was several years ago and the plan was about twice the cost.

Let's see. $7.25/hr minimum wage, 20 hours/week (thanks to ObamaCare),
about $628 per month, before travel costs to the job and government
deductions. Then less $208/mo for ObamaCare deductible, less ObamaCare
monthly premiums ....

Oh, sure, we are fine. Fat cat liberals saved us once again.

>What this all tells me is that historically, the insurance industry has been shifting costs onto smaller groups in order to keep subscribers from places like Boeing and similar large institutions on board.
>
>And so if YOUR insurance goes up because of Obamacare, I'm happy--because it means that I'm no longer being forced to pay for YOUR goddamned health care.

I'm very surprised to see you freely admit that this is just one more
Obama redistribution of wealth scheme. I'm glad you are a winner. A
dozen others will be losers to make up for that. But then again, you
don't speak for the public, do you?

By the way, most of the new people getting insurance - the previously
uninsured - those that couldn't afford it, didn't get it from their
job - YOU will be paying THEIR "goddamned health care". About 30
million of them. And the illegal immagrants thank you too for picking
up their "goddamned health care". Just wait until we get to full
ObamaCare circa 2020.

>> does not want ObamaCare no matter what color the wrapping on the
>> Christmas present is.
>
>Of course, THAT explains perfectly why the servers are having so much trouble keeping up with the internet traffic...

Mostly bad design failing under load after three years of extensive
preparation and testing we were told. The exchanges are small potatoes
compared to what google, Ebay, Amazon do day in and day out. Only
ObamaNets collapse hourly.

Or could it be people are terrified of the fines, fees, penalties,
garnishments, and property seizures that come with failing to buy a
policy from one of Obama's chosen private insurance companies? Gotta
pay for all those D campaign contributions somehow.

Poor people are going to lose their drivers licenses and some will
lose their houses so you can get some of their pathetically small
wealth redirected to your pocket.

[rbowman]

BeamMeUpScotty wrote:

> WHERE ARE MOST BUSINESSES... THAT LIE AND CHEAT PEOPLE AND STEAL.

Loke JPMorgan? Paying their fine and going on with business:

http://business.time.com/2013/09/27/money-talking-jp-morgans-11-billion-
would-send-the-wrong-message/

11 billion is just the cost of doing business.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 18:36:47 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 16:48:17 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>"Winston_Smith" wrote

>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Diplomatic_Relations#Summary_of_provisions
>>>"Article 22. The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an embassy, are inviolate and must not be entered by the host country except by permission of the head of the mission. Furthermore, the host country must protect the mission from intrusion or damage. The host country must never search the premises, nor seize its documents or property. Article 30 extends this provision to the private residence of the diplomats."
>>
>> Nicely spun. The host country provides security around the embassy.
>
>No "spin", it's just the way it it...
>
>> Your cite says they "must not be entered by the host country", so
>
>So, you're saying the attack came from inside the embassy?

The murders were inside the embassy. Yes, they were killed while
inside the embassy. People died after terrorists got in and set fire
to it. If Obama and Clinton had bothered to provide security the
terrorists would never have been inside.

>Republicans forgot to pay the umbrella man...

Who gets paid for what is up to Obama and Clinton. They didn't do
their job. People died. That's the Republicans fault.

>> and then their bogus claim it had never rained.
>
>Romoney said that too, during the debates...
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZV9xLPWOPs

In another part of this thread you cited him as an incompetent fool.
Now he is your authority? Weasel, weasel, toil and tweezel.

[George Plimpton]

On 10/4/2013 7:38 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 18:36:47 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>> "Winston_Smith" wrote
>>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 16:48:17 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>> "Winston_Smith" wrote
>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Diplomatic_Relations#Summary_of_provisions
>>>> "Article 22. The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an embassy, are inviolate and must not be entered by the host country except by permission of the head of the mission. Furthermore, the host country must protect the mission from intrusion or damage. The host country must never search the premises, nor seize its documents or property. Article 30 extends this provision to the private residence of the diplomats."
>>>
>>> Nicely spun. The host country provides security around the embassy.
>>
>> No "spin", it's just the way it it...
>>
>>> Your cite says they "must not be entered by the host country", so
>>
>> So, you're saying the attack came from inside the embassy?
>
> The murders were inside the embassy.

You fuckwit: the American embassy is not in Benghazi. It's in Tripoli.
What the *fuck* is wrong with you?

Benghazi has a consulate, and Stevens was *not* in the consulate
buildings. He was in some kind of "safe house."

You're fucking worthless.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 19:45:09 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
wrote:

He is still dead. It is still because Obama and Clinton screwed up.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 19:45:09 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:

>You fuckwit: the American embassy is not in Benghazi. It's in Tripoli.
> What the *fuck* is wrong with you?
>
>Benghazi has a consulate, and Stevens was *not* in the consulate
>buildings. He was in some kind of "safe house."
>
>You're fucking worthless.

Not my claim that it was an embassy. I just repeated the original
error - as did everyone in this thread.

|-- So, when the embassy was under attack, I remember hearing
|-- later there were troops and other armed forces who COULD
|-- have responded (like the two brave warriors who did). The
|-- web articles about cut funding don't change the facts that
|-- the embassy asked for help, and help was available. And that
|-- Hillary! and Obama lack of action "Yes, we could have,
|-- but no we didn't" failed to save their lives.
|-- Christopher A. Young
|-- Learn about Jesus
|-- www.lds.org

Kudos on your correction and on your erudite and refined manor of
posting. As a liberal, you should be very proud of your progress.

[Winston_Smith]

>On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 19:45:09 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>>You fuckwit: the American embassy is not in Benghazi. It's in Tripoli.
>> What the *fuck* is wrong with you?
>>
>>Benghazi has a consulate, and Stevens was *not* in the consulate
>>buildings. He was in some kind of "safe house."
>>
>>You're fucking worthless.
>
>Not my claim that it was an embassy. I just repeated the original
>error - as did everyone in this thread.
>

Correction. As I look further back in the thread I see the original
error was from one of yours.

Precision machinist wrote:
|-- House Republicans cut the administration's request for embassy security =
|-- funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012.

I'm still impressed with your network style and grace. Few liberals
can manage to be that politically correct. Kudos.

[George Plimpton]

On 10/4/2013 8:00 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 19:45:09 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:

>> On 10/4/2013 7:38 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 18:36:47 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>> "Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 16:48:17 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>>>> "Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>
>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Diplomatic_Relations#Summary_of_provisions
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Article 22. The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an
>>>>>> embassy, are inviolate and must not be entered by the host country
>>>>>> except by permission of the head of the mission. Furthermore, the
>>>>>> host country must protect the mission from intrusion or damage. The
>>>>>> host country must never search the premises, nor seize its
>>>>>> documents or property. Article 30 extends this provision to the
>>>>>> private residence of the diplomats."
>>>>>
>>>>> Nicely spun. The host country provides security around the embassy.
>>>>
>>>> No "spin", it's just the way it it...
>>>>
>>>>> Your cite says they "must not be entered by the host country", so
>>>>
>>>> So, you're saying the attack came from inside the embassy?
>>>
>>> The murders were inside the embassy.
>>

>> You fuckwit: the American embassy is not in Benghazi. It's in Tripoli.
>> What the *fuck* is wrong with you?
>

> Not my claim that it was an embassy.

Fucking liar. Fucking snipping squat-to-piss faggot liar.

"The murders were inside the embassy." You wrote that, you filthy cunt
liar. You *did* claim it was an embassy. That's why you snipped that
part of your post out in your reply, you chickenshit.

[George Plimpton]

You still lied, you fucking piece of filth.

Why did you leave it in this time but snip it out of your first gutless
coward's reply, you chickenshit?

[George Plimpton]

On 10/4/2013 8:05 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
>> On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 19:45:09 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
>>
>>> You fuckwit: the American embassy is not in Benghazi. It's in Tripoli.
>>> What the *fuck* is wrong with you?
>>>
>>> Benghazi has a consulate, and Stevens was *not* in the consulate
>>> buildings. He was in some kind of "safe house."
>>>
>>> You're fucking worthless.
>>
>> Not my claim that it was an embassy. I just repeated the original
>> error - as did everyone in this thread.
>>
> Correction. As I look further back in the thread I see the original
> error was from one of yours.

Sorry, chickenshit: *YOU* are the one who wrote, "The murders were
inside the embassy."

The error is yours, but being a gutless squat-to-piss fat fuck, you
can't admit you fucked it up.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"jon_banquer" <jonba...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:458f4c60-505f-4fa7...@googlegroups.com...

> Stay as far away from Kaiser Permanente as you can. They kill people. They
> are totally no good and they will nickel and dime you to death.

I spent 15 years with Kaiser when I was with Boeing, never a problem. In
contrast, the insurance I've got right now ALWAYS seems to weasel out of
paying.

[George Plimpton]

Kaiser is decent; little jonny banqueer is full of shit. He's a
health-abusing diabetic who is reaping what he has sown.

Kaiser isn't great. It used to be better. When I was self employed and
had to provide my own health insurance, I had a standard Kaiser plan for
my family, and our care was decent and the price was reasonable. Now
I'm a full-time employee of a big firm, and I selected Kaiser for my
health care coverage. It's expensive, and I now have a substantial
deductible that I didn't used to have - *any* - when I was a private pay
subscriber. Nonetheless, the care is good. Little jonny banqueer is,
as usual, completely full of shit.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message

news:vkuu49l26oms5cfj3...@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 18:36:47 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 16:48:17 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>
>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Diplomatic_Relations#Summary_of_provisions
>>>>"Article 22. The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an embassy,
>>>>are inviolate and must not be entered by the host country except by
>>>>permission of the head of the mission. Furthermore, the host country
>>>>must protect the mission from intrusion or damage. The host country must
>>>>never search the premises, nor seize its documents or property. Article
>>>>30 extends this provision to the private residence of the diplomats."
>>>
>>> Nicely spun. The host country provides security around the embassy.
>>
>>No "spin", it's just the way it it...
>>
>>> Your cite says they "must not be entered by the host country", so
>>
>>So, you're saying the attack came from inside the embassy?
>
> The murders were inside the embassy. Yes, they were killed while
> inside the embassy. People died after terrorists got in and set fire
> to it. If Obama and Clinton had bothered to provide security the
> terrorists would never have been inside.

There was security, arguably, not enough perhaps...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Benghazi_attack

"Between 125 and 150 gunmen, "some wearing the Afghan-style tunics favored
by Islamic militants," are reported to have participated in the
assault.[53][54][55] Some had their faces covered and wore flak jackets.[56]
Weapons they used during the attack included rocket-propelled grenades
(RPGs), hand grenades, AK-47 and FN F2000 NATO assault rifles, diesel
canisters, mortars, and heavy machine guns and artillery mounted on gun
trucks"

--there are a total of about 1000 Marine Embassy Guards worldwide, which
make up 122 detachments, 18 of which are stationed in Africa and the middle
east.

Bearing in mind that widespread unrest had been brewing across the entire
middle east over the film "Innocence of Muslims", how many Marines do you
suppose then it would have taken to repel this particular attack?

>>Republicans forgot to pay the umbrella man...
>
> Who gets paid for what is up to Obama and Clinton. They didn't do
> their job. People died. That's the Republicans fault.

Obviously, you haven't read the links I've provided.

The primary job of the security detachment is to protect or destroy
sensitive data, protecting property and the lives of embassy staff and US
citizens is secondary.

In other words, protection of life and property ONLY occurs after the data
has been secured or destroyed.

>>> and then their bogus claim it had never rained.
>>
>>Romoney said that too, during the debates...
>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZV9xLPWOPs
>
> In another part of this thread you cited him as an incompetent fool.
> Now he is your authority? Weasel, weasel, toil and tweezel.

Say what?

--look, maintaining an embassy is an act of faith, not an invading military
encampment.

I don't like this anymore than you do, but it's up to the host country to
maintain civil rest and to keep the embassy grounds and staff safe from an
attack, and from a legal standpoint, if an embassy is attacked, there is
little to do except pray while watching it burn.

Remove the spin, and two obvious facts still remain:

1) Only a fool would claim we should have/could have sent troops in there to
deal with the situation as it transpired.

2) There were so many attackers involved that it probably wouldn't have been
sucessfully repelled even if every single member of the 18 detachments
stationed in the region at the time had been transfered to the Benghazi area
several days prior.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 20:08:12 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
wrote:

>You still lied, you fucking piece of filth.
>
>Why did you leave it in this time but snip it out of your first gutless
>coward's reply, you chickenshit?

Having fun? Just the way they taught you in the Obama school of
remedial liberalism. I can't begin to tell you how proud we all are of
your progress. That goes for all of us across the political spectrum.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 20:10:11 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
wrote:

>The error is yours, but being a gutless squat-to-piss fat fuck, you
>can't admit you fucked it up.

Maybe if we all chipped together and bought you a night with Michelle
in the Lincoln bedroom, you could relieve some of that tension. Does
that sound like something you would want?

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 20:06:35 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
wrote:

>Fucking liar. Fucking snipping squat-to-piss faggot liar.
>
>"The murders were inside the embassy." You wrote that, you filthy cunt
>liar. You *did* claim it was an embassy. That's why you snipped that
>part of your post out in your reply, you chickenshit.

Ah, yes. I see now. You are polishing up your rhetoric for the next
campaign. How could it have taken me so long to figure out your
classic childish cry's for attention. Good boy. Sit. Roll over.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message

news:h90v49pp7p402naoi...@4ax.com...

There were two attacks, the fact that the embassy building itself was not
attacked is irrelevant for all intents and purposes.

[George Plimpton]

On 10/4/2013 9:08 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 20:08:12 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
> wrote:
>
>> You still lied, you fucking piece of filth.
>>
>> Why did you leave it in this time but snip it out of your first gutless
>> coward's reply, you chickenshit?
>
> Having fun? Just the way they taught you in the Obama school of
> remedial liberalism.

You're still fucking up. I'm not an Obama partisan. I'm not a liberal.
But you're not what you pretend.

[George Plimpton]

On 10/4/2013 9:09 PM, winnie, squat-to-piss queer, lied:

> On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 20:10:11 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
> wrote:

>> On 10/4/2013 8:05 PM, winnie, squat-to-piss queer, lied:

>>>> On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 19:45:09 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You fuckwit: the American embassy is not in Benghazi. It's in
>>>>> Tripoli.
>>>>> What the *fuck* is wrong with you?
>>>>>
>>>>> Benghazi has a consulate, and Stevens was *not* in the consulate
>>>>> buildings. He was in some kind of "safe house."
>>>>>
>>>>> You're fucking worthless.
>>>>
>>>> Not my claim that it was an embassy. I just repeated the original
>>>> error - as did everyone in this thread.
>>>>
>>> Correction. As I look further back in the thread I see the original
>>> error was from one of yours.
>>
>> Sorry, chickenshit: *YOU* are the one who wrote, "The murders were
>> inside the embassy."
>>

>> The error is yours, but being a gutless squat-to-piss fat fuck, you
>> can't admit you fucked it up.
>
> Maybe if we all chipped together and

You fucked up. Just admit that you fucked up.

It's too late, winnie. You can't pretend you're a conservative or
reasonable Republican any longer. You fucked that up weeks ago.

[jon_banquer]

I had Kaiser Permanente for 1 year. I've never had worse health care in my life. I cried tears of joy when the company I was working for at the time dumped them. They kill people.

[George Plimpton]

On 10/4/2013 9:12 PM, winnie, squat-to-piss queer, lied:

> On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 20:06:35 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>

>> On 10/4/2013 8:00 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>> On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 19:45:09 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>> On 10/4/2013 7:38 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 18:36:47 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>>>> "Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 16:48:17 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Diplomatic_Relations#Summary_of_provisions
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Article 22. The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an
>>>>>>>> embassy, are inviolate and must not be entered by the host country
>>>>>>>> except by permission of the head of the mission. Furthermore, the
>>>>>>>> host country must protect the mission from intrusion or damage. The
>>>>>>>> host country must never search the premises, nor seize its
>>>>>>>> documents or property. Article 30 extends this provision to the
>>>>>>>> private residence of the diplomats."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nicely spun. The host country provides security around the embassy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No "spin", it's just the way it it...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your cite says they "must not be entered by the host country", so
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, you're saying the attack came from inside the embassy?
>>>>>

>>>>> The murders were inside the embassy.
>>>>

>>>> You fuckwit: the American embassy is not in Benghazi. It's in Tripoli.
>>>> What the *fuck* is wrong with you?
>>>
>>> Not my claim that it was an embassy.
>>

>> Fucking liar. Fucking snipping squat-to-piss faggot liar.
>>
>> "The murders were inside the embassy." You wrote that, you filthy cunt
>> liar. You *did* claim it was an embassy. That's why you snipped that
>> part of your post out in your reply, you chickenshit.
>
> Ah, yes. I see now. You are polishing up your

I'm pointing out that you're a fuckwitted snipping liar, you stupid
proggie queer.

[jon_banquer]

I own you, bitch. I always have and I always will. Deal with it.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message

news:cqru49pmr9aigr5su...@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 18:16:32 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>> On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 14:36:22 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>
>>>>--the Republican party has brought this onto the American people,
>>>>by electing boneheads who still can't quite seem to come to grips
>>>
>>> I realize hardcore leftists don't think this way, but they were
>>> elected by the people - not by the party. In most cases, they beat out
>>> party candidates in primaries. People who one by one trudged to the
>>> polls and made a choice. You know, the people, or what you call
>>> sheeple. Prolies.
>>
>>The fact remains, they are Republicans.
>
> Weasel, weasel, toil and tweezel. They voted for an R this time.

AND AS A RESULT, REPUBLICANS WERE ELECTED, YOU NITWIT.

> No
> one says they belong to the party. Most people that vote for one party
> or the other do not consider themselves members. They certain have no
> voice in party doings even if they do consider themselves members.
>
> Most party candidates were defeated at the primary, so the party had
> little to do with picking candidates.
>
> You wrote "the Republican party has ..." Now you say it's not the
> actual party but every Joe Sixpack that cast a vote for an R in one
> election.
>
> Well, here is a hint. Then they ARE the majority of the voters. You
> are joining Michelle in saying America is evil.
>
>>>>with the fact that Obama was duly elected in 2008,
>>>
>>> You seem to be incapable of coming to grips that the House was elected
>>> as it is specifically because the people didn't like what they got in
>>> ObamaCare
>>
>>Obamacare was signed into law on March 23, 2010; the Tea party platform
>>was at that time (and still is today) mostly based on "lower taxes and
>>less government spending".
>
> Yeah? And?
>
> Are they bad things?

They were not Obamacare.

>>> once Ds had rammed it though so we could see what was in it.
>>> They elected people who promised to repeal or defund ObamaCare.
>>
>>And they've failed miserably, despite trying incessantly.
>
> Then why are you here whining that they aren't playing ball with you?
>

I'm not the one whining, suggest look in the mirror...

>>>>the affordable care act was
>>>
>>> Classic legislative lie. It is far from affordable. It is simply a D
>>> mandate that everyone buy something they don't want and can't afford
>>> from one of the many private insurance companies that funded the Ds
>>> campaigns.
>>>
>>>>made into law in 2010 and was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2012,
>>>
>>> Not quite. Obama spend years telling us it was not a tax. It was a
>>> "mandate". The Supreme Court said then it was unconstitutional because
>>> you can not mandate that some one must make a purchase. What they did
>>> say was if it was a tax, then it could squeak by under a clause that
>>> has long been abused.
>>>
>>> Obama's lawyers in court said OK, great, it's a tax. While Obama and
>>> the D echo chamber keep saying it's not a tax.
>>
>>Deflect all you want, but the fact remains, it's indeed been upheld by the
>>Supreme Court.
>
> On one technical point. And,

More deflection, I bet...

> most important, not by the higher court,
> the voters. POTUS said you can do it. They did not say you must do it.
> They did not say anyone wanted it. They just said if Obama gave up his
> lie of saying a new tax was a "mandate", then he could squeak by. They
> ruled on no other issue in the entire, complex mess.
>

Yup.

> They certainly never said it can't be repelled. They certainly never
> said Congress has to fund it.
>
>>>>and who, in addition to losing seats in both the house
>>>>and the senate last November,
>>>
>>> Huh. Ds controlled both houses when ObamaCare passed. Once the public
>>> got a whiff of what it was, they handed the budget making authority,
>>> the House,
>>
>>Which then turned around lost several of the seats it had gained during
>>this last mid term election...
>
> "Midterm elections in the United States refer to general elections in
> the United States that are held two years after the quadrennial
> (four-year) elections for the ..".
>
> ObamaCare was enacted in 2010. The presidential election was in 2012.

My mistake, I'll rephrase: "this last election"

> The first mid term election will be next year. But you are telling us
> the Rs lost (past tense) seats in it ?????
>
> Stop making things up. You aren't up to keep your lies organized.
>
>>> over to the Rs you are bitching so much about.
>>
>>>>also lost their bid for the presidency for the second time runnning
>>>
>>> The moron that gave Obama the model for ObamaCare and his word for
>>> selling it - mandate. And chose not to run for a second term as
>>> governor of a very liberal state because he was going to get his ass
>>> whooped because of RomneyCare.
>>>
>>> That just shows that idiocy runs in both parties. And that the public
>
>>Speak for yourself, you do not represent "the public"....
>
> Nor do you. Liberals seem to always miss that point.
>

Never claimed I did.

> The public did speak when they rejected "I love mandates" RomneyCare
> and put in anti-ObamaCare Representatives. It's not my opinion; I'm
> just reporting history.
>
>>My insurance plan from Lifewise is going to be about $100.00 a month
>>cheaper than it used to be, starting in January...
>
>>But I think we're going to pay about ten dollars more per month instead
>>and sign up with Kaiser, the deductible would be $1000 per year instead of
>>the current $2500 and no more worries about "approved providers" and "out
>>of network fees", etc. Last time I checked with Kaiser was several years
>>ago and the plan was about twice the cost.
>
> Let's see. $7.25/hr minimum wage, 20 hours/week (thanks to ObamaCare),

Yet, hours per week has remained relatively unchanged.

http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=CE_cesbref2

> about $628 per month, before travel costs to the job and government
> deductions. Then less $208/mo for ObamaCare deductible, less ObamaCare
> monthly premiums ....
>
> Oh, sure, we are fine. Fat cat liberals saved us once again.
>

You're utterly clueless.

>>What this all tells me is that historically, the insurance industry has
>>been shifting costs onto smaller groups in order to keep subscribers from
>>places like Boeing and similar large institutions on board.
>>
>>And so if YOUR insurance goes up because of Obamacare, I'm happy--because
>>it means that I'm no longer being forced to pay for YOUR goddamned health
>>care.
>
> I'm very surprised to see you freely admit that this is just one more
> Obama redistribution of wealth scheme. I'm glad you are a winner. A

The way I see it, I'm no longer an extortion victim.

> dozen others will be losers to make up for that. But then again, you
> don't speak for the public, do you?
>
> By the way, most of the new people getting insurance - the previously
> uninsured - those that couldn't afford it, didn't get it from their
> job - YOU will be paying THEIR "goddamned health care". About 30

I've been paying for it since 1986, goofball, every single time one of them
walks into an emergency room...

> million of them. And the illegal immagrants thank you too for picking

Pretty sure illegals are not eligible, they'll just continue showing up at
the emergency room on my dime....

> up their "goddamned health care". Just wait until we get to full
> ObamaCare circa 2020.
>
>>> does not want ObamaCare no matter what color the wrapping on the
>>> Christmas present is.
>>
>>Of course, THAT explains perfectly why the servers are having so much
>>trouble keeping up with the internet traffic...
>
> Mostly bad design failing under load after three years of extensive
> preparation and testing we were told. The exchanges are small potatoes
> compared to what google, Ebay, Amazon do day in and day out. Only
> ObamaNets collapse hourly.
>
> Or could it be people are terrified of the fines, fees, penalties,

The fee in 2014 is 1% of your yearly income or $95 per person for the year

> garnishments, and property seizures that come with failing to buy a

There are provisions for the indigent, just don't try buying a new motor
home when you should be purchasing insurance instead.

> policy from one of Obama's chosen private insurance companies? Gotta
> pay for all those D campaign contributions somehow.
>
> Poor people are going to lose their drivers licenses and some will

LOL are my tires going to go flat more often too ?

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message

news:0pqu499rkl7g2a2bl...@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 17:21:07 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 14:47:27 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>>>>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Secretary of State had
>>>>>>> every authority to allot and change as conditions warranted and
>>>>>>> changed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The problem with "conditions" is that usually they change with little
>>>>>>or no advance warning.
>>>>>
>>>>> And how is it then the fault of Republican appropriations made months
>>>>> and years earlier. My, how the left loves to wiggle out of all
>>>>> responsibility.
>>>>
>>>>When five people have five umbrellas amoungst themselves and then
>>>>someone takes away two of them, who's fault is it when two people get
>>>>wet?
>>>
>>> Clinton for not shipping the umbrellas stored elsewhere. For denying
>>
>>Since when is it Obama's responsiblility to try and guess which US
>>Ambassador might not need an umbrella tomorrow afternoon?
>
> Unless you can identify a source of infinite funds, it comes with the
> job. That might be one definition of "competent". And he is not. And
> his buddy Clinton is not.
>

As if Clinton personally makes out the duty roster.

> You also conveniently over look that security experts were complaining

I'm sure all of them routinely request additional security...

> about the danger before anything happened, but Obama didn't want to
> appear not to trust his Muslim brothers. He was wrong. People died.

22 January 2002:
Calcutta, India. Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami gunmen attack Consulate, 5 dead

14 June 2002:
Karachi, Pakistan. Al-Qaeda truck bomb detonates outside Consulate, killing
12

28 February 2003:
Islamabad, Pakistan. Unknown gunmen attack Embassy, 2 deaths.

30 June 2004:
Tashkent, Uzbekistan. Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan suicide bomber attacks
Embassy, killing 2

6 December 2004:
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al-Qaeda gunmen raid diplomatic compound, 9 dead

2 March 2006:
Karachi, Pakistan. Car bomb explodes outside Consulate, killing 2

12 September 2006:
Damascus, Syria. Gunmen raid US Embassy, killing 4

18 March 2008:
Sana'a, Yemen. Mortar attack against US Embassy, 2 deaths

9 July 2008:
Istanbul, Turkey. Armed attack against Consulate, 6 people are killed

17 September 2008:
Sana'a, Yemen. Two car bombs explode outside US embassy in Yemeni capital,
killing 16

5 April 2010:
Peshawar, Pakistan. An attack near the U.S. Consulate kills two consulate
security guards and at least six others.

11 September 2012:
Republicans become enraged when a group of terrorists storm the U.S.
Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, killing the U.S. Ambassador and three others.

> The Republicans are respoinsible for that - if you do have to go back
> two years to find you weasle opening.
>
>>> permission for anyone to respond with AR unbrellas. And then for
>>
>>I've already told you, we don't have authortiy to do that, under the
>>Vienna convention.
>
> Yes, you have. And you are wrong. If you were right, is it better
> that our people die than we get Vienna unhappy?
>
>>>>All available information suggests that to the vast majority of
>>>>participants, it was indeed over an obscure movie.
>>>
>>> Hogwash.
>>
>>Briilliant counter arguement...
>
> Glad you like it. It's yours every time you are face with an

My mistake, the demonstration was in Egypt...

--you could have simply corrected me.

> inconvenient truth you don't know how to weasle out og.

No, *I* would have corrected you, and provided cites.

>>>>> well planned terrorist attack. They stonewalled it until the truth was
>>>>> rammed up their ying-yangs. That is the Republican's fault.
>>>>
>>>>Obama called it a terrorist act the very next day, while speaking in in
>>>>the white house garden.
>>>
>>> Hogwash.
>>
>>And yet another...
>
> Still yours.

No, he called it a terrorist act the very next day, here's the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Nu6VZ9DeVc

>>>>> There was intelligence long in advance of the Fort Hood shooting about
>>>>> the increasing radicalization and mental instability of one of Obama's
>>>>
>>>>Of course, we need to arrest anyone that displays "mental
>>>>instability"....
>>>
>>> You might take away their guns. You might give them mental treatment
>>> instead of denying the truth and shipping them from base to base to be
>>> someone else's problem.
>>
>>Unfortunately, Republicans won't consider anything of the sort.
>
> Boy, you are whacko. Not taking guns from everyone is not the same

The standard right wing arguement is that he'd have gotten ahold of a gun
anyways....

> thing as taking guns from a miltiary person, on a military base, who

They're against taking guns from ANYONE, if it inconveniences them even a
tiny bit, Winston

> is identified as an extremist Muslim, who is identified as a potential
> terrorist, who is identified as having mental problems, who is himself

Sounds a lot like Mark Wieber, to me....

see (i) (ii) and (iii) above....

> It comes with a few percent. You confuse "all Muslims are terrorists"

He murdered out of hatred, spite, and internal religious
conflict....terrorist acts are (or must appear to be) intended to intimidate
or coerce a civilian population,
to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or to

affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or

kidnapping.

Sorry but if you don't like the law as it's currently written, suggest write
your congressman.

> with "most terrorists are Muslim".

He is a murderer, that he is Muslim does not make his actions also an act of
terrorism.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

Doesn't matter because if they were employees of the embassy they have
diplomatic standing where ever they happen to be.

[Max Boot]

Ambassador Stevens died from smoke inhalation.

[Tom Gardner]

On 10/3/2013 3:02 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>
>> "Snag" <snag...@msn.com> wrote in message news:Lci3u.15058$dB1....@fx24.iad...
>>>
>>> "Gunner Asch" <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:qf0r499ls3qus7j39...@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>> NPS orders closure of park that receives no federal funding
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> By Lachlan Markay - Washington Free Beacon
>>>>
>>>> Wednesday, October 2, 2013
>>>>
>>>> The National Park Service has ordered the closure of a Virginia park
>>>> that sits on federal land, even though the government provides no
>>>> resources for its maintenance or operation.
>>>>
>>>> The Claude Moore Colonial Farm announced on Wednesday that NPS has
>>>> ordered it to suspend operations until Congress agrees to a deal to
>>>> fund the federal government.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Same kind of bullshit going on here in Stone County Ar . The NPS has
>>> locked up the rifle range that sits on Nat'l Forest land , locked the gates
>>> on the bike trails , closed the local office . A guy that was fishing at the
>>> lake at Blanchard Springs Caverns <also closed> was ordered to leave ,
>>> because "it's closed due to the budget crisis" .
>
>
> You mean Obama has decided to CLOSE NATURE down until government funding
> can pay for NATURE to go back to work?
>
>
>

You can bet they didn't shut down the "Shrimp Treadmills"!

[Gunner Asch]

On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 19:37:52 -0500, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:

>"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
>news:IbadnVCW1-e3dtDP...@scnresearch.com...
>
>
>>"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in
>>message news:2al3u.62138$Hr1....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com...
><snip>
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe start with half the white house housekeeping staff
>>
>>Do you EVER ACTUALLY THINK before opening your fucking cake hole?
>>
>>http://www.thedailymeal.com/news/white-house-chefs-affected-shutdown/100113
>>
>>"of the 90 people on the executive residence staff, only 15 people are
>>staying on during the shutdown."
>
>
>So why do they have 90 people when only 15 are considered essential? Why
>are there so many "Non-Essential" workers to burden taxpayers and run up
>trillion dollar per year debts when they aren't deemed necessary?
>
>Why did Obama send more enforcement to close the WWII memorial than he had
>in Benghazi? Why did Obama spend money to close parks that aren't funded by
>the government?
>
>The simple answer is that Obama is a piece of shit that knows the idiots
>that voted for him are too stupid to believe anything other than what he
>tells them. Libtards would gladly eat the corn out of Obama's poop he he
>told them to.
>
>You talking about someone not thinking is the pot calling the kettle black.
>
>RogerN
>
Well stated!! Bravo!!


"The socialist movement takes great pains to circulate frequently new labels for its ideally constructed state.
Each worn-out label is replaced by another which raises hopes of an ultimate solution of the insoluble basic
problem of Socialism, until it becomes obvious that nothing has been changed but the name.
The most recent slogan is "State Capitalism."[Fascism] It is not commonly realized that this covers nothing more
than what used to be called Planned Economy and State Socialism, and that State Capitalism, Planned Economy,
and State Socialism diverge only in non-essentials from the "classic" ideal of egalitarian Socialism. - Ludwig von Mises (1922)

[Gunner Asch]

On Thu, 03 Oct 2013 18:22:12 -0400, Frank
<frankdo...@comcast.net> wrote:

>On 10/3/2013 1:55 PM, Snag wrote:
>> "Gunner Asch" <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:qf0r499ls3qus7j39...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> NPS orders closure of park that receives no federal funding
>>>
>>>
>>> By Lachlan Markay - Washington Free Beacon
>>>
>>> Wednesday, October 2, 2013
>>>
>>> The National Park Service has ordered the closure of a Virginia park
>>> that sits on federal land, even though the government provides no
>>> resources for its maintenance or operation.
>>>
>>> The Claude Moore Colonial Farm announced on Wednesday that NPS has
>>> ordered it to suspend operations until Congress agrees to a deal to
>>> fund the federal government.
>>>
>>
>> Same kind of bullshit going on here in Stone County Ar . The NPS has
>> locked up the rifle range that sits on Nat'l Forest land , locked the gates
>> on the bike trails , closed the local office . A guy that was fishing at the
>> lake at Blanchard Springs Caverns <also closed> was ordered to leave ,

>> because "it's closed due to the budget crisis" . That rotten cocksucker in
>> the White House has gone out of his way to make it hurt the people , when
>> there was absolutely no need to do so . Bet he hasn't grounded his choppers
>> and AF1 though - he's just out to hurt the people he's supposed to serve .
>> What next , martial law because we won't stand for his bullshit ?
>> It won't surprise me a bit if open season on politicians is declared ...
>> and it ain't just the dems , it's all of 'em . Bet there are a lot of
>> current officeholders that ain't gonna get re-elected next time around ...if
>> there IS a next time .
>> --
>> Snag
>> disgruntled citizen
>>
>>
>
>I drew a stand to muzzleload deer hunt Oct 16 on Federal game land here.
>Called to find the refuge is closed. Guess I won't get to hunt and they
>will keep my $3 application fee too. $3 does not seem like a lot but in
>these lotteries rejection rate can be 90% and they charge $10 the day of
>the hunt so it is basically self paid for.
>
>You can also bet when this is over those furloughed will get full back pay.

Of course they will, its in the law.

Gunner

[BeamMeUpScotty]

You can't hunt on teh Kings land.....

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 21:20:19 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
wrote:

>You're still fucking up. I'm not an Obama partisan. I'm not a liberal.
> But you're not what you pretend.

What, pray tell, is that?

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 23:20:45 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 17:21:07 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:

>As if Clinton personally makes out the duty roster.

She does as to how many personnel in each category. That's just a
basic component of making a budget. All bosses do that.

>> You also conveniently over look that security experts were complaining
>
>I'm sure all of them routinely request additional security...

That's why there is a boss. To sort it out. Her job, with advisors, is
to sort it out and make decisions. Maybe this was an honest screwup,
maybe it was a political foreign policy statement. Either way, people
died.

big snip

>
>> thing as taking guns from a miltiary person, on a military base, who
>
>They're against taking guns from ANYONE, if it inconveniences them even a
>tiny bit, Winston

People are taken to the nut house. They don't get to pack their bags
before going. At least not without supervision.

>> is identified as an extremist Muslim, who is identified as a potential
>> terrorist, who is identified as having mental problems, who is himself
>
>Sounds a lot like Mark Wieber, to me....

Nah, this guy did something. Granted, something negative. Gunner
describes himself as a lovable fuzzball while issuing periodic death
threats. It's his little fantasy world where he is important. The only
actual killing I know about is his dog and that was through stupidity.
Granted, most of use would have seen the danger and done things
differently. I'd call him harmless if you don't say arf, arf.

>> It comes with a few percent. You confuse "all Muslims are terrorists"
>
>He murdered out of hatred, spite, and internal religious
>conflict....terrorist acts are (or must appear to be) intended to intimidate
>or coerce a civilian population,
>to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or to
>affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or
>kidnapping.

That's too narrow. It may be official but it doesn't capture reality.
Terrorism is anything meant to terrorize. Political, religious, color,
or just don't like those (fill in the blank). Some school playground
bullying is being called terrorism. I think that's too far a stretch
of the word, but that's how the world is defining it.

>Sorry but if you don't like the law as it's currently written, suggest write
>your congressman.
>
>> with "most terrorists are Muslim".
>
>He is a murderer, that he is Muslim does not make his actions also an act of
>terrorism.

It does when you have a presence on jihadi web sites and go out
shooting innocents in the street while yelling Allah is great.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 21:22:00 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
wrote:

>It's too late, winnie. You can't pretend you're a conservative or
>reasonable Republican any longer.

I have gone to some lengths over the years to say I most certainly am
NOT a Republican. I've also gone to some lengths to point out I
consider myself a paleo-conservative. I want no truck with the social
reactionaries in the Republican party that have currently captured
that name. They are not conservatives on the social side of politics
and they are spendthrift liberals on the fiscal side.

>You fucked that up weeks ago.

Heck, I fucked things up 65 years ago at my earliest memory of such
things.

Why don't you make this simple and just say what you think I am. Take
as much white space as you wish.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 21:14:49 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>"Winston_Smith" wrote

I understand that. Not an issue with me. My comments were meant to go
to Plimpton. He's the one having the problem.

I think his real problem is he's having trouble finding things to
troll about. Still, idiocy is sometimes amusing and he's a great
example of that.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 21:46:36 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT"
<precisionm...@notmail.com> wrote:

>YOU NITWIT.

>
>I'm not the one whining, suggest look in the mirror...
>

>More deflection, I bet...
>
>You're utterly clueless.

>
>I've been paying for it since 1986, goofball,

I see we are done having rational discussion. So be it.

>>
>> Poor people are going to lose their drivers licenses and some will
>
>LOL are my tires going to go flat more often too ?

My reference is
Message-ID: <SMk3u.68617$xr1....@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com>
|-- I received an email tonight at 5:00 P.M. informing me that
|-- my fine would be $4,037 and could be attached to my yearly income tax
|-- return. Then you make it to the “REPERCUSSIONS PORTION” for
|-- “non-payment” of yearly fine. First, your drivers license will be
|-- suspended until paid, and if you go 24 consecutive months with
|-- “Non-Payment” and you happen to be a home owner, you will have a federal
|-- tax lien placed on your home. You can agree to give your bank
|-- information so that they can easy “Automatically withdraw” your
|-- “penalties” weekly, bi-weekly or monthly! This by no means is “Free” or
|-- even “Affordable.”

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message

news:r79159hfsbbb9v8tt...@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 23:20:45 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>>"Winston_Smith" wrote
>>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 17:21:07 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT" wrote:
>
>>As if Clinton personally makes out the duty roster.
>
> She does as to how many personnel in each category. That's just a
> basic component of making a budget. All bosses do that.
>

Q: Exactly how many individuals would she have needed to transfer from other
diplomatic missions in the region in order to have sucessfully thwarted the
attack at Benghazi?

A: All of them.

>>> You also conveniently over look that security experts were complaining
>>
>>I'm sure all of them routinely request additional security...
>
> That's why there is a boss. To sort it out. Her job, with advisors, is
> to sort it out and make decisions. Maybe this was an honest screwup,
> maybe it was a political foreign policy statement. Either way, people
> died.
>
> big snip
>>
>>> thing as taking guns from a miltiary person, on a military base, who
>>
>>They're against taking guns from ANYONE, if it inconveniences them even a
>>tiny bit, Winston
>
> People are taken to the nut house. They don't get to pack their bags
> before going. At least not without supervision.
>

Not until they actually DO something that demonstrates that they are a
danger to themselves or others.

>>> is identified as an extremist Muslim, who is identified as a potential
>>> terrorist, who is identified as having mental problems, who is himself
>>
>>Sounds a lot like Mark Wieber, to me....
>
> Nah, this guy did something. Granted, something negative. Gunner
> describes himself as a lovable fuzzball while issuing periodic death
> threats. It's his little fantasy world where he is important. The only
> actual killing I know about is his dog and that was through stupidity.
> Granted, most of use would have seen the danger and done things
> differently. I'd call him harmless if you don't say arf, arf.
>
>>> It comes with a few percent. You confuse "all Muslims are terrorists"
>>
>>He murdered out of hatred, spite, and internal religious
>>conflict....terrorist acts are (or must appear to be) intended to
>>intimidate
>>or coerce a civilian population,
>>to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or to
>>affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or
>>kidnapping.
>
> That's too narrow. It may be official but it doesn't capture reality.

You're making up your own meanings for words.

> Terrorism is anything meant to terrorize. Political, religious, color,
> or just don't like those (fill in the blank). Some school playground
> bullying is being called terrorism. I think that's too far a stretch
> of the word, but that's how the world is defining it.
>

The applicable law is clear on this.

So is the dictionary.....specifically, a desire to intimidate or coerce
through his actions has not been demonstrated.

>>Sorry but if you don't like the law as it's currently written, suggest
>>write
>>your congressman.
>>
>>> with "most terrorists are Muslim".
>>
>>He is a murderer, that he is Muslim does not make his actions also an act
>>of
>>terrorism.
>
> It does when you have a presence on jihadi web sites and go out
> shooting innocents in the street while yelling Allah is great.

No, it only makes him a murdering conservative religious fundamentalist.

[PrecisionmachinisT]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message

news:cva1595fm108iji2i...@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 21:46:36 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT"
> <precisionm...@notmail.com> wrote:
>
>>YOU NITWIT.
>>
>>I'm not the one whining, suggest look in the mirror...
>>
>>More deflection, I bet...
>>
>>You're utterly clueless.
>>
>>I've been paying for it since 1986, goofball
>

Unfunded mandate, passed by a Republican Senate and signed into law by none
other than President Reagan himself.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Medical_Treatment_and_Active_Labor_Act

> I see we are done having rational discussion. So be it.

Anyone mentioned "presented with inconvenient facts" lately?

>>> Poor people are going to lose their drivers licenses and some will
>>
>>LOL are my tires going to go flat more often too ?
>
> My reference is
> Message-ID: <SMk3u.68617$xr1....@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com>
> |-- I received an email tonight at 5:00 P.M. informing me that
> |-- my fine would be $4,037 and could be attached to my yearly income tax
> |-- return. Then you make it to the "REPERCUSSIONS PORTION" for
> |-- "non-payment" of yearly fine. First, your drivers license will be
> |-- suspended until paid, and if you go 24 consecutive months with
> |-- "Non-Payment" and you happen to be a home owner, you will have a
> federal
> |-- tax lien placed on your home. You can agree to give your bank
> |-- information so that they can easy "Automatically withdraw" your
> |-- "penalties" weekly, bi-weekly or monthly! This by no means is "Free"
> or
> |-- even "Affordable."

You mean this?

http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/penalty.asp