OT ~

[Jan Orme]

Petraeus To Testify Behind Closed Doors On Benghazi Friday
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57550090/petraeus-to-testify-behind-doors-on-benghazi-Friday/

McCain 'goes after' Obama's Failed Leadership
http://video.foxnews.com/v/1969794239001/mccain-goes-after-obamas-failed-leadership/?playlist_id=903226511001


Jan

[Jan Orme]

On Nov 15, 8:47 am, Jan Orme <JanOrm...@aol.com> wrote:
Petraeus To Testify Behind Closed Doors On Benghazi

Fridayhttp://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57550090/petraeus-to-testify-behi...

McCain 'goes after' Obama's Failed

Leadershiphttp://video.foxnews.com/v/1969794239001/mccain-goes-after-obamas-fai...

Jan

[nothermark]

On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 08:47:10 -0800 (PST), Jan Orme <JanO...@aol.com>
wrote:

>Petraeus To Testify Behind Closed Doors On Benghazi Friday
>http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57550090/petraeus-to-testify-behind-doors-on-benghazi-Friday/

It will be interesting to see what trickles out. Probably because it
will make the mole hill even smaller.

>
>McCain 'goes after' Obama's Failed Leadership
>http://video.foxnews.com/v/1969794239001/mccain-goes-after-obamas-failed-leadership/?playlist_id=903226511001

It has come to the point with McSame that I am ever so glad he did not
get elected. Now of the folks in AZ would just do their part we could
stop listening to the mean spirited sore loser.

>
>
>Jan

[Jan Orme]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Benghazi Buck Stops With Obama? (But they pass the Buck anyway...see
below)
http://video.foxnews.com/v/1969791011001/benghazi-buck-stops-with-obama/?playlist_id=903226511001

WH Refers Scandal Questions to Other Agencies 10 Times in 10 Minutes
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/wh-refers-scandal-questions-other-agencies-10-times-10-minutes

Jan

[Jan Orme]

On Nov 15, 2:23 pm, Jan Orme <JanOrm...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Nov 15, 8:49 am, Jan Orme <JanOrm...@aol.com> wrote:> On Nov 15, 8:47 am, Jan Orme <JanOrm...@aol.com> wrote:
> >  Petraeus To Testify Behind Closed Doors On Benghazi
> > Fridayhttp://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57550090/petraeus-to-testify-behi...
>
> >  McCain 'goes after' Obama's Failed
> > Leadershiphttp://video.foxnews.com/v/1969794239001/mccain-goes-after-obamas-fai...
>
> >  Jan
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Benghazi Buck Stops With Obama? (But they pass the Buck anyway...see

> below)http://video.foxnews.com/v/1969791011001/benghazi-buck-stops-with-oba...
>
> WH Refers Scandal Questions to Other Agencies 10 Times in 10 Minuteshttp://cnsnews.com/news/article/wh-refers-scandal-questions-other-age...
>
> Jan
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
King: Petraeus Said CIA's Talking Points Were Edited to Play Down
Terrorism
http://mrctv.org/videos/king-petraeus-said-cias-talking-points-were-edited-play-down-terrorism

Jan

[MaxD]

And that from no less a reliable source than Peter King. LMAO.

[Ralph E Lindberg]

In article <50a6b2c7$0$27185$c3e8da3$66d3...@news.astraweb.com>,

So, the story is the King got a classified briefing and which he then
disclosed????

Snork.

PS for the wingnuts whining about the POTUS disclosing classified info.
Ah, you really need to learn how the government handles classifying and
de-classifying information. It's a function of the Executive branch, not
the Judicial or Legislative. So it's ultimately the President's call
what is, and is not, classified.

--
--------------------------------------------------------
Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org
This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read
RV and Camping FAQ can be found at
http://www.ralphandellen.us/rv

[bill horne]

What, exactly, is classified about "It was terrorists" as opposed to
the lie of "It was extremists reacting to a video"?

--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.

[Mike Hendrix at dot]

On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 20:15:02 -0500, bill horne <red...@rye.net>
wrote:

bill, I agree with you. HOWEVER, as all of us that have worked for
DOD know in spades....... their superiors lie like a coon dog basking
on the porch..... it just comes all too natural for them.

I can remember preparing briefs for Admirals and not recognizing the
comments when they were delivered. Absolutely nothing resembling the
truth or facts of the matter........ but they are the ones that are
masters at telling people what they want to hear. That is how they
get into those positions.

mike
--



Pensacola, FL
http://www.travellogs.us/

[MaxD]

On 11/16/2012 6:15 PM, bill horne wrote:


>
> What, exactly, is classified about "It was terrorists" as opposed to the
> lie of "It was extremists reacting to a video"?
>

Shirley you jest. "Talking points" is the difference.

[nothermark]

On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 20:15:02 -0500, bill horne <red...@rye.net>
wrote:

If you dig a bit I think you will find it was the sources of the
information that they did not want recealed. That is what I recall
but I don't feel like digging it our again.

[Bruce S]

The source of the information was that they were watching it live from a
drone aircraft - that, too, has been known since Sept 11.

--
Bruce

Talent hits a target no one else can hit. Genius hits a target no one
else can see. Arthur Schopenhauer

[bill horne]

Except in this case, they were not telling people what they want to
hear - they were telling people what they wanted them to hear.

[bill horne]

IMO, Buffy, "election" is the difference.

[Ralph E Lindberg]

In article <50a6fe19$0$59873$c3e8da3$b280...@news.astraweb.com>,

Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com> wrote:


>
> The source of the information was that they were watching it live from a
> drone aircraft - that, too, has been known since Sept 11.

...and your source for this is?

[Mike Hendrix at dot]

On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 23:33:11 -0500, bill horne <red...@rye.net>

-------------------------

bill, I think it happens all the time. I seem to remember Colin
Powell delivering a speech to the UN (was it the UN?) In any event he
had been fed "talking points" also. As I recall he was one pissed off
puppy when he found that he had actually been lying with the talking
points he had been provided.

Of course that was under a different administrations so we should
probably forget that one.

[Don Lampson]

On Nov 16, 7:01 pm, Bruce S <bruce.sn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/16/2012 6:53 PM, nothermark wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> > On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 20:15:02 -0500, bill horne <redy...@rye.net>

> > wrote:
>
> >> Ralph E Lindberg wrote:

> >>> In article<50a6b2c7$0$27185$c3e8da3$66d3c...@news.astraweb.com>,
> >>>    MaxD<gmdi...@att.net>  wrote:

>
> >>>> On 11/16/2012 12:42 PM, Jan Orme wrote:
> >>>>> On Nov 15, 2:23 pm, Jan Orme<JanOrm...@aol.com>  wrote:
> >>>>>> On Nov 15, 8:49 am, Jan Orme<JanOrm...@aol.com>  wrote:>  On Nov 15, 8:47
> >>>>>> am, Jan Orme<JanOrm...@aol.com>  wrote:
> >>>>>>>     Petraeus To Testify Behind Closed Doors On Benghazi
> >>>>>>> Fridayhttp://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57550090/petraeus-to-testify-beh
> >>>>>>> i...
>
> >>>>>>>     McCain 'goes after' Obama's Failed
> >>>>>>> Leadershiphttp://video.foxnews.com/v/1969794239001/mccain-goes-after-obama
> >>>>>>> s-fai...
>
> >>>>>>>     Jan
>
> >>>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>>>>> Benghazi Buck Stops With Obama? (But they pass the Buck anyway...see
> >>>>>> below)http://video.foxnews.com/v/1969791011001/benghazi-buck-stops-with-oba
> >>>>>> ...
>
> >>>>>> WH Refers Scandal Questions to Other Agencies 10 Times in 10
> >>>>>> Minuteshttp://cnsnews.com/news/article/wh-refers-scandal-questions-other-ag
> >>>>>> e...
>
> >>>>>> Jan
> >>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>>>> King: Petraeus Said CIA's Talking Points Were Edited to Play Down
> >>>>> Terrorism

> >>>>>http://mrctv.org/videos/king-petraeus-said-cias-talking-points-were-e...

> >>>>> lay-down-terrorism
>
> >>>>> Jan
>
> >>>> And that from no less a reliable source than Peter King.  LMAO.
>
> >>> So, the story is the King got a classified briefing and which he then
> >>> disclosed????
>
> >>> Snork.
>
> >>> PS for the wingnuts whining about the POTUS disclosing classified info.
> >>> Ah, you really need to learn how the government handles classifying and
> >>> de-classifying information. It's a function of the Executive branch, not
> >>> the Judicial or Legislative. So it's ultimately the President's call
> >>> what is, and is not, classified.
>
> >> What, exactly, is classified about "It was terrorists" as opposed to
> >> the lie of "It was extremists reacting to a video"?
>
> > If you dig a bit I think you will find it was the sources of the
> > information that they did not want recealed.  That is what I recall
> > but I don't feel like digging it our again.
>
> The source of the information was that they were watching it live from a
> drone aircraft - that, too, has been known since Sept 11.
>
> --
> Bruce
>
> Talent hits a target no one else can hit. Genius hits a target no one
> else can see.   Arthur Schopenhauer

Who exactly was watching the event live from drone footage, and where
can the rest of us non-believers see this film?

Doubting Thomas

[bill horne]

But you seem to misremember that most leading Democrats and most of
the leaders of the Western World also believed what he said. And they
believed it well before he said it.

> As I recall he was one pissed off
> puppy when he found that he had actually been lying with the talking
> points he had been provided.

-------------------------------------------------
During an interview with The Daily Show host Jon Stewart, former
Secretary of State Colin Powell said he regretted telling the United
Nations that Iraq was harboring weapons of mass destruction.

"I, of course, regret the U.N. speech that I gave," he said, "which
became the prominent presentation of our case. But we thought it was
correct at the time. The President thought it was correct. Congress
thought it was correct."
------------------------------------------------

So who was "lying"?

> Of course that was under a different administrations so we should
> probably forget that one.

No, we should probably remember the facts rather than what you "seem
to remember".

[nothermark]

On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 19:01:53 -0800, Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com>
wrote:

That was one. As I recall the article said there were over 20
information streams most of them classified. No surprise, they did
not list the classified streams. They did mention a drone.

[nothermark]

On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 23:35:25 -0500, bill horne <red...@rye.net>
wrote:

>MaxD wrote:
>> On 11/16/2012 6:15 PM, bill horne wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> What, exactly, is classified about "It was terrorists" as opposed to
>>> the
>>> lie of "It was extremists reacting to a video"?
>>>
>>
>> Shirley you jest. "Talking points" is the difference.
>
>IMO, Buffy, "election" is the difference.

Do you really think the Obama voters gave a rat's ass about Benghazi?

[Mike Hendrix at dot]

On Sat, 17 Nov 2012 03:36:48 -0500, bill horne <red...@rye.net>

-------------------
bill, I do remember those days pretty clearly.

What I remember is that the Bush Administration got rid of anyone that
was not towing the party line. Anyone that did not line up with
Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were replaced. When you stifle other
opinions/information you usually end up with a bad result. And
unfortunately that is what happened.

[Mike Hendrix at dot]

On Sat, 17 Nov 2012 03:36:48 -0500, bill horne <red...@rye.net>

bill, here is a quote from his interview with Barbara Walters:

"Asked further how he felt upon learning that he had been misled about
the accuracy of intelligence on which he relied, Mr. Powell said,
"Terrible." He added that it was "devastating" to learn later that
some intelligence agents knew the information he had was unreliable
but did not speak up."

[Hank]

> Who exactly was watching the event live from drone footage, and where
>
> can the rest of us non-believers see this film?
>
>
>
> Doubting Thomas

Good point Don. If the Drone was so telling, that only means that the Seals that dis-obeyed orders may be alive today, had they obeyed the orders to stand down. IF you believe all the reports.

I don't know what REALLY happened, as do none of us. But it sure is fun to play along with this discussion from people who don't have a clue. :-)

Hank

[bill horne]

Why did the intelligence agencies of other nations think the same thing?

[bill horne]

So who was "lying"? Who "misled" him?

Why did the intelligence agencies of other nations think the same thing?

[MaxD]

On 11/16/2012 9:35 PM, bill horne wrote:
> MaxD wrote:
>> On 11/16/2012 6:15 PM, bill horne wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> What, exactly, is classified about "It was terrorists" as opposed to
>>> the
>>> lie of "It was extremists reacting to a video"?
>>>
>>
>> Shirley you jest. "Talking points" is the difference.
>
> IMO, Buffy, "election" is the difference.
>

Quite so, Mr. Holmes, that's why they had "Talking Points".

[MaxD]

On 11/17/2012 1:36 AM, bill horne wrote:


> -------------------------------------------------
> During an interview with The Daily Show host Jon Stewart, former
> Secretary of State Colin Powell said he regretted telling the United
> Nations that Iraq was harboring weapons of mass destruction.
>
> "I, of course, regret the U.N. speech that I gave," he said, "which
> became the prominent presentation of our case. But we thought it was
> correct at the time. The President thought it was correct. Congress
> thought it was correct."
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> So who was "lying"?

The Cheney War Cabal

[MaxD]

Um...Foreign Aid??

[nothermark]

If you remember back to that time Saddam was working hard to maintain
the image that he had weapons of mass destruction. I would bet he was
caught in a bind where if he said there were none he would have been
in trouble as fast or faster with his neighbors.

[Don Lampson]

> Terrorismhttp://mrctv.org/videos/king-petraeus-said-cias-talking-points-were-e...
>
> Jan


Petraeus said they're statement about the attack blamed anger over the
anti-muslim film, because they were hoping to catch the terrorists
who had actually done it! That sounds reasonable to me?

Terry, without the Pirates

[dm_callier]

On Saturday, November 17, 2012 5:17:38 AM UTC-8, bill horne wrote:
<snip>

> So who was "lying"? Who "misled" him?
>
>
>
> Why did the intelligence agencies of other nations think the same thing?
>

French President Chirac was quoted as saying words to the effect,that the intelligence services "sometimes intoxicate each other".

[bill horne]

Did he happen to say who was lying?

[MaxD]

On 11/17/2012 7:27 PM, bill horne wrote:
> dm_callier wrote:
>> On Saturday, November 17, 2012 5:17:38 AM UTC-8, bill horne wrote:
>> <snip>
>>> So who was "lying"? Who "misled" him?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Why did the intelligence agencies of other nations think the same thing?
>>>
>>
>> French President Chirac was quoted as saying words to the effect,that
>> the intelligence services "sometimes intoxicate each other".
>
> Did he happen to say who was lying?
>

He said, "Tous les".

[bill horne]

Froggy? Dat chew?

[Jan Orme]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Are you are asking yourself?

Have you always been a Dumb Fuck? Have you seen the film? Know anyone
who has or did see it by 9/11/12? Can you post it here?

Cripes! We all know that the Rat Bastard Muslim Radicals are flat
nutso against Freedom Of Speech. But those buggers with their AK-47s
and Grenade Rockets didn't see it or even hear about it except in yet
another Planned Obama Wet Dream Lie. My bet is that this is the
Benghazi version of Mexican Cartel Fast And Furious Gun Running like
hidden by your Eric Holder...only this one is them running guns to
Syrian Rebels. Wanna bet?

Unlike the Watergate Break In and theft. This time four Americans are
Dead. And I suspect that those two SEALs took out a raft of bad guys
during the 7 hours they were engaged before they were killed by mortor
fire. Those folks that were supposedly pissed off about your "anti-
muslim film" ...do you suppose they were kinda like some pissed off
prisoners in your Slam that wanted better food and such? Ever
encounter that kinda spontanious problem? Did they have AK-47s,
Mortors or Grenade Launcers that the coulds burn down the slam with
like we see from Benghazi Footage? Hmmm..?

Or do you even give a shit?

Jan

[Don Lampson]

Your nutcase rants, & ravings, are sort of like LZ's delusions about
what he knows "really" went on at Waco. He just can't figure out
why the Feds / Reno / Clinton weren't prosecuted for murdering all
those innocent, gun loving Christians, when it's obvious they're all
guilty as sin? <wink wink>

WTF does "Fast & Furious" have to do with the attack in Benghazi, or
me being a prison guard over a dozen years ago? I suspect you've had
a few highballs to wash down your pain pills with after getting your
teeth yanked? You're having fantasies about Obama being in "big
trouble", and think those who voted for him should be in big trouble
too - For treason, at least? HawHawHaw!

I notice you couldn't spell "mortars", or "launchers", and suggest
you take a look at your dopey ramblings (that would give Richard
plenty of competition for most stupid postings) when you sober up
tomorrow?

Romney lost. Obama was reelected, and will continue being President.
Get used to it!

Fearless Fosdick

[MaxD]

Oui, il est, mon ami.

Max, la grenouille

[Lone Haranguer]

I've got a few carbon certificates left for those who still
haven't caught on,
LZ

[Jan Orme]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bengahzi has NOTHING to do with the Election, LZ. BUT....people like
Lampson want it to go away and not be reminded that four people died
and don't want to be reminded that they don't give a shit.

It may take some time but this is going to stick in their craw for a
long while. It ain't going away as long as the families are still
around. And they will be.

Jan

[Mike Hendrix at dot]

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:43:27 -0800 (PST), Jan Orme <JanO...@aol.com>
wrote:

------------------------

Jan, there is no doubt that the "Obama" administration spun the
message. No doubt.

As to the part about 4-people died. Yea they did, but a LOT more have
died in Afghanistan since that incident. Why aren't you as upset
about those deaths as your are the deaths in Bengazi?

It is fairly obvious that you want to do anything to discredit Obama.
That is all that you have posted in the past 8-months. Attacking
Obama from a position of weakness only makes you look foolish, kinda
like Donald Trump foolish, if you get my drift.

Obama is in the White House for another 4-years, it is time to make
the best of it. Democrats have control of the Senate, it is time to
make the most of it.

If you and the right wing nut cases keep singing off the same sheet of
music you are going to be in the same predicament come the next
election.

It is your choice, wake up.

[Ralph E Lindberg]

In article <ua9ia8lqctahg9f6n...@4ax.com>,

Mike Hendrix <mike (at) travellogs (dot) us> wrote:


>
> Jan, there is no doubt that the "Obama" administration spun the
> message. No doubt.
>
> As to the part about 4-people died. Yea they did, but a LOT more have
> died in Afghanistan since that incident. Why aren't you as upset
> about those deaths as your are the deaths in Bengazi?
>
> It is fairly obvious that you want to do anything to discredit Obama.
> That is all that you have posted in the past 8-months. Attacking
> Obama from a position of weakness only makes you look foolish, kinda
> like Donald Trump foolish, if you get my drift.
>
> Obama is in the White House for another 4-years, it is time to make
> the best of it. Democrats have control of the Senate, it is time to
> make the most of it.
>
> If you and the right wing nut cases keep singing off the same sheet of
> music you are going to be in the same predicament come the next
> election.
>
> It is your choice, wake up.
>

Mike, there are so MANY real things to beat Obama up over, things he
has done (and shouldn't have), things he hasn't done (and should have).
But Jan would rather just spout the talking points from the ODS folk.

--
--------------------------------------------------------
Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org
This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read
RV and Camping FAQ can be found at
http://www.ralphandellen.us/rv

[Hank]

Mike says.....

Jan, there is no doubt that the "Obama" administration spun the
message. No doubt.

As to the part about 4-people died. Yea they did, but a LOT more have
died in Afghanistan since that incident. Why aren't you as upset
about those deaths as your are the deaths in Bengazi?

It is fairly obvious that you want to do anything to discredit Obama.
That is all that you have posted in the past 8-months. Attacking
Obama from a position of weakness only makes you look foolish, kinda
like Donald Trump foolish, if you get my drift.

Obama is in the White House for another 4-years, it is time to make
the best of it. Democrats have control of the Senate, it is time to
make the most of it.

If you and the right wing nut cases keep singing off the same sheet of
music you are going to be in the same predicament come the next
election.

It is your choice, wake up.

mike

I say... Ah! A voice of reason. So refreshing.

Hank

[Bruce S]

On 11/18/2012 10:31 AM, Ralph E Lindberg wrote:
> In article <ua9ia8lqctahg9f6n...@4ax.com>,
> Mike Hendrix <mike (at) travellogs (dot) us> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Jan, there is no doubt that the "Obama" administration spun the
>> message. No doubt.
>>
>> As to the part about 4-people died. Yea they did, but a LOT more have
>> died in Afghanistan since that incident. Why aren't you as upset
>> about those deaths as your are the deaths in Bengazi?
>>
>> It is fairly obvious that you want to do anything to discredit Obama.
>> That is all that you have posted in the past 8-months. Attacking
>> Obama from a position of weakness only makes you look foolish, kinda
>> like Donald Trump foolish, if you get my drift.
>>
>> Obama is in the White House for another 4-years, it is time to make
>> the best of it. Democrats have control of the Senate, it is time to
>> make the most of it.
>>
>> If you and the right wing nut cases keep singing off the same sheet of
>> music you are going to be in the same predicament come the next
>> election.
>>
>> It is your choice, wake up.
>>
> Mike, there are so MANY real things to beat Obama up over, things he
> has done (and shouldn't have), things he hasn't done (and should have).
> But Jan would rather just spout the talking points from the ODS folk.

I'm sure both of you had exactly the same opinion and encouraged people
to ignore Nixon's coverup of the Watergate affair too. After all, why
would you treat one presidential coverup differently from the next?

--
Bruce

Talent hits a target no one else can hit. Genius hits a target no one
else can see. Arthur Schopenhauer

[bill horne]

Don Lampson wrote:

> Romney lost. Obama was reelected, and will continue being President.
> Get used to it!

Yes. Yes, yes.
No!

[Mike Hendrix at dot]

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 10:50:39 -0800, Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com>
wrote:

-----------------------

Apples & oranges and you know it.

Spokes people (Rice) are provided talking points every time they get
up to speak..... just ask Colin Powell. And Powell is as honest as
the day is long.

I am certainly not excusing the Administrations twisting of facts (and
that was obviously done). But the Republicans need to back off Rice.

Now if we find out that the people killed in Bengazi were on a "gun
smuggling" mission then I suspect opinions will change with the
public. Until then all this hullabaloo is just making the folks who
are upset up about it look foolish.

Of course they have delighted in looking foolish for the past
8-months. It is time to move on and set a new course.

It really is time to move on.

[bill horne]

> Apples& oranges and you know it.

>
> Spokes people (Rice) are provided talking points every time they get
> up to speak..... just ask Colin Powell. And Powell is as honest as
> the day is long.
>
> I am certainly not excusing the Administrations twisting of facts (and
> that was obviously done).

I'm glad to hear you accept that.

> But the Republicans need to back off Rice.

And I agree with that - she probably wasn't in the Benghazi loop. In
fact, the President said that she wasn't - which raises the question
of why she was the one sent out to talk about it.

> Now if we find out that the people killed in Bengazi were on a "gun
> smuggling" mission then I suspect opinions will change with the
> public. Until then all this hullabaloo is just making the folks who
> are upset up about it look foolish.

IMO, the terrorism connection was suppressed because it didn't fit
with the President's campaign claim that 'bin Laden is dead and the
terrorists are on the run'. (but just to be clear for the reading
disabled, i'm not arguing that bin laden is not dead)

> Of course they have delighted in looking foolish for the past
> 8-months. It is time to move on and set a new course.

Move on to where? The last I heard, the President and the Democrats
want to continue with the same policies of the last 4 years - which is
not a "new course". But I admit to being surprised that the recent
Gulf oil rig fire - and worker deaths - hasn't resulted in a
shallow-water well "moratorium".

[Mike Hendrix at dot]

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 16:25:32 -0500, bill horne <red...@rye.net>
wrote:

>IMO, the terrorism connection was suppressed because it didn't fit
>with the President's campaign claim that 'bin Laden is dead and the
>terrorists are on the run'. (but just to be clear for the reading
>disabled, i'm not arguing that bin laden is not dead)

bill, I certainly would not argue against that. At this moment I bet
the Administration wishes they had handled things differently.

>
>> Of course they have delighted in looking foolish for the past
>> 8-months. It is time to move on and set a new course.
>
>Move on to where? The last I heard, the President and the Democrats
>want to continue with the same policies of the last 4 years - which is
>not a "new course".

You have a point. However, the President and Democrats seem to be
representing a majority of the population. I do not necessarily agree
with the majority but that is the message the voters sent.

As you know I want to cut spending. I want to cut it drastically. I
do not think it is going to happen. Democrats seem to only be willing
to cut Defense spending while the Republicans seem to only be willing
to cut domestic programs. Sadly the American people will be the
loser.

>But I admit to being surprised that the recent
>Gulf oil rig fire - and worker deaths - hasn't resulted in a
>shallow-water well "moratorium".

That might be a surprise to me as well but I think Obama is wising up
and trying to not be as reactionary to things like that. Especially
the shellacking he took over the Canadian pipe line deal.

Eric Holder has taken a lot of heat the past few years..... much of it
deserved. However, he delivered a pretty big win with the BP
settlement announced this week. That leaves me to wonder if a
Republican Attorney General would have even filed charges. It seems
to me that Republicans tend to dismiss virtually everything a
corporation does.

mike








Pensacola, FL
http://www.travellogs.us/

[bill horne]

Mike Hendrix wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 16:25:32 -0500, bill horne<red...@rye.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>> IMO, the terrorism connection was suppressed because it didn't fit
>> with the President's campaign claim that 'bin Laden is dead and the
>> terrorists are on the run'. (but just to be clear for the reading
>> disabled, i'm not arguing that bin laden is not dead)
>
> bill, I certainly would not argue against that. At this moment I bet
> the Administration wishes they had handled things differently.
>
>>
>>> Of course they have delighted in looking foolish for the past
>>> 8-months. It is time to move on and set a new course.
>>
>> Move on to where? The last I heard, the President and the Democrats
>> want to continue with the same policies of the last 4 years - which is
>> not a "new course".
>
> You have a point. However, the President and Democrats seem to be
> representing a majority of the population. I do not necessarily agree
> with the majority but that is the message the voters sent.

I contend that you don't know what message the voters sent, because
each bloc of voters voted for - or against - different things. And
there is no rule or law of science/economics/etc that says the
"majority" knows the correct solution to something.

> As you know I want to cut spending. I want to cut it drastically. I
> do not think it is going to happen. Democrats seem to only be willing
> to cut Defense spending while the Republicans seem to only be willing
> to cut domestic programs. Sadly the American people will be the
> loser.

Nothing new there. Somebody loses even if stuff gets cut.

>> But I admit to being surprised that the recent
>> Gulf oil rig fire - and worker deaths - hasn't resulted in a
>> shallow-water well "moratorium".
>
>
> That might be a surprise to me as well but I think Obama is wising up
> and trying to not be as reactionary to things like that. Especially
> the shellacking he took over the Canadian pipe line deal.
>
> Eric Holder has taken a lot of heat the past few years..... much of it
> deserved. However, he delivered a pretty big win with the BP
> settlement announced this week. That leaves me to wonder if a
> Republican Attorney General would have even filed charges.

That seems like an extreme wondering.

> It seems
> to me that Republicans tend to dismiss virtually everything a
> corporation does.

That seems like an extreme seeming.

[Bruce S]

Powell never said anything he didn't believe to be true.

> I am certainly not excusing the Administrations twisting of facts (and
> that was obviously done). But the Republicans need to back off Rice.

She either lied, or is completely incompetent. Either way, she should
never be approved for a promotion.

[Mike Hendrix at dot]

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 18:01:51 -0800, Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com>

-------------------------------

Bruce, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I doubt that is
the majority opinion. I think most thinking individuals see this as
another witch hunt launched by the wing-nuts.

[Don Lampson]

On Nov 25, 7:45 pm, Dean <roa...@k7no.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 12:22:55 -0600, Mike Hendrix <mike (at) travellogs
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> (dot) us> wrote:
> >On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:43:27 -0800 (PST), Jan Orme <JanOrm...@aol.com>
> >wrote:

>
> >>On Nov 18, 7:05šam, Lone Haranguer <linus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Don Lampson wrote:
> >>> > On Nov 16, 11:42 am, Jan Orme <JanOrm...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>> >> On Nov 15, 2:23 pm, Jan Orme <JanOrm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>> >>> On Nov 15, 8:49 am, Jan Orme <JanOrm...@aol.com> wrote:> On Nov 15, 8:47 am, Jan Orme <JanOrm...@aol.com> wrote:

> >>> >>>> š Petraeus To Testify Behind Closed Doors On Benghazi
> >>> >>>> Fridayhttp://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57550090/petraeus-to-testify-behi...
> >>> >>>> š McCain 'goes after' Obama's Failed
> >>> >>>> Leadershiphttp://video.foxnews.com/v/1969794239001/mccain-goes-after-obamas-fai...
> >>> >>>> š Jan

> >>> >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>> >>> Benghazi Buck Stops With Obama? (But they pass the Buck anyway...see
> >>> >>> below)http://video.foxnews.com/v/1969791011001/benghazi-buck-stops-with-oba...
> >>> >>> WH Refers Scandal Questions to Other Agencies 10 Times in 10 Minuteshttp://cnsnews.com/news/article/wh-refers-scandal-questions-other-age...
> >>> >>> Jan
> >>> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>> >> King: Petraeus Said CIA's Talking Points Were Edited to Play Down
> >>> >> Terrorismhttp://mrctv.org/videos/king-petraeus-said-cias-talking-points-were-e...
>
> >>> >> Jan
>
> >>> > Petraeus said they're statement about the attack blamed anger over the

> >>> > anti-muslim film, šbecause they were hoping to catch the terrorists
> >>> > who had actually done it! šThat sounds reasonable to me?
>
> >>> > Terry, šwithout the Pirates

>
> >>> I've got a few carbon certificates left for those who still
> >>> haven't caught on,
> >>> LZ
> >>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>Bengahzi has NOTHING to do with the Election, LZ. BUT....people like
> >>Lampson want it to go away and not be reminded that four people died
> >>and don't want to be reminded that they don't give a shit.
>
> >>It may take some time but this is going to stick in their craw for a
> >>long while. It ain't going away as long as the families are still
> >>around. And they will be.
>
> >>Jan
> >------------------------
>
> >Jan, there is no doubt that the "Obama" administration spun the
> >message.  No doubt.
>
> >As to the part about 4-people died.  Yea they did, but a LOT more have
> >died in Afghanistan since that incident.  Why aren't you as upset
> >about those deaths as your are the deaths in Bengazi?
>

> Those 4 were non-combatents.  Or are you incapable of telling the
> difference?  I suspect 99.9 of people do likewise.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >It is fairly obvious that you want to do anything to discredit Obama.
> >That is all that you have posted in the past 8-months.  Attacking
> >Obama from  a position of weakness only makes you look foolish, kinda
> >like Donald Trump foolish, if you get my drift.
>
> >Obama is in the White House for another 4-years, it is time to make
> >the best of it.  Democrats have control of the Senate, it is time to
> >make the most of it.
>
> >If you and the right wing nut cases keep singing off the same sheet of
> >music you are going to be in the same predicament come the next
> >election.
>
> >It is your choice, wake up.
>
> >mike
>
> --
>

> All things being equal, the only difference
> between the wealthy and the poor is AMBITION.


The SEALs were non-combatents, and according to Jan, they killed 60
attackers?


Barry Saddler

[Mike Hendrix at dot]

On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 20:45:40 -0700, Dean <roa...@k7no.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 12:22:55 -0600, Mike Hendrix <mike (at) travellogs
>(dot) us> wrote:
>

>>On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:43:27 -0800 (PST), Jan Orme <JanO...@aol.com>
>>wrote:
>>

>>>On Nov 18, 7:05šam, Lone Haranguer <linus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Don Lampson wrote:
>>>> > On Nov 16, 11:42 am, Jan Orme <JanOrm...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >> On Nov 15, 2:23 pm, Jan Orme <JanOrm...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >>> On Nov 15, 8:49 am, Jan Orme <JanOrm...@aol.com> wrote:> On Nov 15, 8:47 am, Jan Orme <JanOrm...@aol.com> wrote:

>>>> >>>> š Petraeus To Testify Behind Closed Doors On Benghazi
>>>> >>>> Fridayhttp://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57550090/petraeus-to-testify-behi...
>>>> >>>> š McCain 'goes after' Obama's Failed
>>>> >>>> Leadershiphttp://video.foxnews.com/v/1969794239001/mccain-goes-after-obamas-fai...
>>>> >>>> š Jan

>>>> >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>> >>> Benghazi Buck Stops With Obama? (But they pass the Buck anyway...see
>>>> >>> below)http://video.foxnews.com/v/1969791011001/benghazi-buck-stops-with-oba...
>>>> >>> WH Refers Scandal Questions to Other Agencies 10 Times in 10 Minuteshttp://cnsnews.com/news/article/wh-refers-scandal-questions-other-age...
>>>> >>> Jan
>>>> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>> >> King: Petraeus Said CIA's Talking Points Were Edited to Play Down
>>>> >> Terrorismhttp://mrctv.org/videos/king-petraeus-said-cias-talking-points-were-e...
>>>>
>>>> >> Jan
>>>>
>>>> > Petraeus said they're statement about the attack blamed anger over the

>>>> > anti-muslim film, šbecause they were hoping to catch the terrorists
>>>> > who had actually done it! šThat sounds reasonable to me?
>>>>
>>>> > Terry, šwithout the Pirates

>>>>
>>>> I've got a few carbon certificates left for those who still
>>>> haven't caught on,
>>>> LZ
>>>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>Bengahzi has NOTHING to do with the Election, LZ. BUT....people like
>>>Lampson want it to go away and not be reminded that four people died
>>>and don't want to be reminded that they don't give a shit.
>>>
>>>It may take some time but this is going to stick in their craw for a
>>>long while. It ain't going away as long as the families are still
>>>around. And they will be.
>>>
>>>Jan
>>------------------------
>>
>>Jan, there is no doubt that the "Obama" administration spun the
>>message. No doubt.
>>
>>As to the part about 4-people died. Yea they did, but a LOT more have
>>died in Afghanistan since that incident. Why aren't you as upset
>>about those deaths as your are the deaths in Bengazi?
>

>Those 4 were non-combatents. Or are you incapable of telling the
>difference? I suspect 99.9 of people do likewise.

Dean, dead people are dead people aren't they? Their parents grieve?
Their children no longer have parents?

Do one of your lawyer tricks and explain to the jury all the nuisances
dead people have and why some are more important than others.

mike
--

>
>>
>>It is fairly obvious that you want to do anything to discredit Obama.
>>That is all that you have posted in the past 8-months. Attacking
>>Obama from a position of weakness only makes you look foolish, kinda
>>like Donald Trump foolish, if you get my drift.
>>
>>Obama is in the White House for another 4-years, it is time to make
>>the best of it. Democrats have control of the Senate, it is time to
>>make the most of it.
>>
>>If you and the right wing nut cases keep singing off the same sheet of
>>music you are going to be in the same predicament come the next
>>election.
>>
>>It is your choice, wake up.
>>
>>mike

Pensacola, FL
http://www.travellogs.us/

[nothermark]

On Mon, 26 Nov 2012 08:52:15 -0600, Mike Hendrix <mike (at) travellogs

Might also figure out how paid security forces in a hostile
environment and evidently well armed are "innocent bystanders". One
or two of them were part of the response team that knew they were
going in as a rescue party.

[Lone Haranguer]

Dean wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 12:22:55 -0600, Mike Hendrix <mike (at) travellogs
> (dot) us> wrote:
>

> Those 4 were non-combatents. Or are you incapable of telling the
> difference? I suspect 99.9 of people do likewise.

Mikey doesn't want to admit that incompetence by Obama & Co. is
the reason 4 Americans were killed on what is technically U.S.
territory while Afghanistan is a battlefield.

Stupid can't be cured.
LZ