Here's Why The Media Denies it Was Terrorism

[Intense]

Where did you get that bubble of comfortable living by intellectual dishonesty? Our nation is responsible for hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded over the past 20 years in Iraq alone. What the ****? How do people so neatly carve out their own little tiny slices of peyote reality?

Sources please. It better add up to more than 200,000 too.

Sorry, you're currently on the Link Strike list. If you feel you have reached this message in error please contact our Appeals and Grievances Department. Thank you for your cooperation.

This Post made You Supporting Your Claims an Issue! You changed Your position, so I dropped the matter. Bottom line no matter the issue or side one is on, be ready to support it. Allbright is not one of My favorite People. I find Myself in harmony with little She has done or said. If You need to apologize for being born or existing, feel free to do so, just don't include Me.

 

[Intense]

I hope some are saved from getting their panties in a bunch when they read the info.

"CBS Reporter Lesley Stahl (speaking of post-war sanctions against Iraq):
"We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And - and you know, is the price worth it?"

Madeleine Albright (at that time, US Ambassador to the UN):
"I think this is a very hard choice, but the price - we think the price is worth it."


Seven years later albright tried to backpedal:

"I must have been crazy; I should have answered the question by reframing it and pointing out the inherrent flaws in the premise behind it. Saddam Hussein could have prevented any child from suffering by simply meeting his obligations."


It's typical for people to try to ignore this by saying it was the UN. That is true but it's ******* stupid to ignore we were the ones driving it and she pointed out that Bush said the Sanctions would remain as long as Saddam was in power......which means Albright's claim is bullshit because even one hundred percent adherence would not have ended them. While the numbers are not exact it is safe to say the claim we have killed and wounded hundreds of thousands in iraq over the past 20 years is easily supported by this and other sources regarding the increase during our invasion and occupation. The original study cited by CBS was flawed but a different study within iraq reflected the same info.

"The CESR study that estimated 500,000 excess deaths among Iraqi children (cited in the CBS report) was found to be methodologically flawed.

However, a 1999 UNICEF survey within Iraq reinforced the earlier studies. Based on new data, it also estimated 500,000 excess deaths among Iraqi children under 5-years old.

UN Assistant Secretary General Denis Halliday, the Humanitarian Coordinator for the Oil for Food program in Iraq, resigned in 1998 to protest sanctions that he later termed "genocidal".
Sanctions and War in Iraq

The sanctions were not designed to hurt Saddam but only the iraqis in hopes they would revolt against the Ba'ath Party. It's safe to say as a Nation we do not have the moral authority to ***** about needless killing.

Wow, Albright did it! Clinton screwed up big time, huh. How about Carter? If Carter had supported the Shah of Iran, how many lives would have been saved? If We would have stayed in Lebanon, how many lives would have been saved? It's Reagan's fault too.........!

UN Supported Sanctions killing the World off Eh? What was the alternative? War? Political Assassination? We can't get anything right. You can't get anything wrong? Your philosophy points too many fingers, what it really needs is a mirror to point at.

Thank you so much for the example of what layers of fallacies look like when responding to information. I look forward to reading your genuine response because I know you wouldn't demand links to support a claim only to not address the information.

You are too gullible.

 

[Liberalism]

Let me share with my fellow board members a theory that helps us explain all of the administration and MSM proclamations that...
1. Major Hasan was just a ‘nut,’ and his actions were not related to Islamofascist terrorism
2. We should wait until ‘all the evidence is in’…
3. Better we take a pass on identifying Major Hasan’s motivations than risk losing ‘diversity’
4. It's all those right-wingers...

Here is the real skinny’
1. Anyone who hasn’t lived in a distant cave for the last decade knows that this was an act of Islamo-fascist terrorism
2. We had to rely on the British press to find out Major Hasans outbursts and links to terrorists.
3. Red-flags as to the dangers posed by this individual were buried based on a fear of being painted with the red letter “R” for racist.

Here is Dick Morris’ analysis, one which ties together both sets of bullet-points:

A major criticism of both Candidate Obama and of President Obama was that his attitude and actions with respect to protecting this country form Moslem terrorism was both the laxity and use of the power of government to investigate and restrict, vis-à-vis the Bush Administration.
1. Close Gitmo
2. Make nice with captured terrorists
3. Pressure interrogators to restrict investigations
4. Create the atmosphere that makes citizens reluctant to question any 'strange' activities

Many said we would suffer the effects of this ‘new’ attitude, and that if there were to be acts of terrorism, they would be the responsibility of President Obama..

Now we see the big push by the administration and the media to shield the President by announcing that this was surely not terrorism: anything but.

It's your call.

You list 4 statements of Dick Morris'. Only one is a fact and three are, and here I'm being generous, opinion and interpretation. Next you conclude with an absurdity not worthy of rational debate. Why is this?

 

[Intense]

The good thing about being a trained monkey is knowing how to read which comes in handy when needing to look at interview where our own government admits reponsibility for the deaths we caused.

Now we're getting somewhere. We know for a fact your a trained monkey. As far as UN representives go, I don't consider them reliable sources for information.

Okay....**** what Albright had to say.....even though she was the first woman in US history to become Secretary of State........

There are several sources confirming the same information and you choose to ignore that by hiding behind UN Reps? What about the other sources? Maybe you can be creative in how you ignore those but I will bookmark this so the next time you demand a link I will use this as evidence your motivation is not in honest dialogue, but simply a farce of intellectual honesty to maintain your preconceived and demonstrably false positions regardless of available information.

Total Bullshit. You post a Link to back up your claim. It took you long enough. On top of that You are making it an issue again? For what purpose? To what end? You miss the point. You are off Topic. You use the Link as if has some magic power, which it does not. Allbright was an Ass, in a Position above Her ability. The UN is Filled with Fascist Dictators and Totalitarians, dying to make Us look bad, and who are you cheering for?

 

[Liberalism]

Now we're getting somewhere. We know for a fact your a trained monkey. As far as UN representives go, I don't consider them reliable sources for information.

Okay....**** what Albright had to say.....even though she was the first woman in US history to become Secretary of State........

There are several sources confirming the same information and you choose to ignore that by hiding behind UN Reps? What about the other sources? Maybe you can be creative in how you ignore those but I will bookmark this so the next time you demand a link I will use this as evidence your motivation is not in honest dialogue, but simply a farce of intellectual honesty to maintain your preconceived and demonstrably false positions regardless of available information.

Total Bullshit. You post a Link to back up your claim. It took you long enough. On top of that You are making it an issue again? For what purpose? To what end? You miss the point. You are off Topic. You use the Link as if has some magic power, which it does not. Allbright was an Ass, in a Position above Her ability. The UN is Filled with Fascist Dictators and Totalitarians, dying to make Us look bad, and who are you cheering for?

The UN is filled with dictators and fascists? Omg, I do hope you do not own a firearm. There are restrictions on the mentally unstable owning those darned things.

 

[Intense]

IF the righties were HONEST and consistent then based on how they used the "it's his watch, it's his fault" argument when clinton was presdient then they would have applied that same standard to W. However, the fact is that the right did NOT apply that same standard to W and now that a dem is in office they are once again flip flopping and showing how truly hypocrtiical and inconsistent they are.

Golly Gee Wizz is it OK to blame the CIC for the PC and the tone it creates? What Think You OP? Is the PC tone different under the DNC than it was under the RNC? Did the PC tone effect the Abilities involved? Was the DOD effected differently under DNC rule, or is this PC an excuse and are the RNC Hypocritical.

AAAAAA the Association for the Abolition of Abused Abbreviations and Asinine Acronyms
Military Acronyms, Initialisms, and Abbreviations

So since some of the "red flags" with hasan occured under W's watch and were not acted on am I to assume, based on your attempt to lay blame on the CIC that you are blaming bush for this? Or are you trying to claim that all of the "PC" crap that you are trying to lay at obama's feet occurred within the last 9+ months??
If that is your claim then could you please provide PROOF to back up your assertion?

My claim is rooted more in the culture, it does stem more from the Left though we see it on the Right too. The failure to profile for fear of Whom might be offended is carried too far. Government, Corporate, Social aspects cross the line of reason. I stumbled across AAAAAA and got a kick out of it, I love to hear Acronym Speak, so I included it. I respect the guy that came up with this one.

When We act by Reason and Conscience, We are at Out best. Contradictions and fear of consequence corrupt that. Collective Reason usually victimizes Objective Reason, when in conflict, the numbers dominate, not the truth, not justice. Mob Rule.

 

[Liberalism]

Golly Gee Wizz is it OK to blame the CIC for the PC and the tone it creates? What Think You OP? Is the PC tone different under the DNC than it was under the RNC? Did the PC tone effect the Abilities involved? Was the DOD effected differently under DNC rule, or is this PC an excuse and are the RNC Hypocritical.

AAAAAA the Association for the Abolition of Abused Abbreviations and Asinine Acronyms
Military Acronyms, Initialisms, and Abbreviations

So since some of the "red flags" with hasan occured under W's watch and were not acted on am I to assume, based on your attempt to lay blame on the CIC that you are blaming bush for this? Or are you trying to claim that all of the "PC" crap that you are trying to lay at obama's feet occurred within the last 9+ months??
If that is your claim then could you please provide PROOF to back up your assertion?

My claim is rooted more in the culture, it does stem more from the Left though we see it on the Right too. The failure to profile for fear of Whom might be offended is carried too far. Government, Corporate, Social aspects cross the line of reason. I stumbled across AAAAAA and got a kick out of it, I love to hear Acronym Speak, so I included it. I respect the guy that came up with this one.

When We act by Reason and Conscience, We are at Out best. Contradictions and fear of consequence corrupt that. Collective Reason usually victimizes Projective Reason, when in conflict, the numbers dominate, not the truth, not justice. Mob Rule.

Could you please speak in plain English? Collective reason, projective reason? Who speaks that way in real life?

 

[Intense]

Yep. You nailed it. The warning signs were ignored because of the 'new' attitude of the Obama Administration.

and yet there is NO proof of that opinion despite the author of this thread being asked to provide some MULTIPLE times. Imagine that.

Can you offer proof that ALL of the "red flags" occured only AFTER obama took office? If not then doesn't bush deserve a large part of the blame that you are trying to lay only at obama's feet?

Don't you get it yet? When they blamed 9E on Clinton because Dubya was in office for only 8 months they swore the logic was sound. However, they have had revelations since then and while they still don't blame Dubya they don't blame Clinton either so blaming Obama is logically consistent, free of hypocrisy, and places the welfare of our nation at the epicenter of their concern. When will you get off the partisan hackery and care more about America instead of a Party?!?

I think that when You speak for Yourself, You shine best. You do not however make the best spokes person for Our side. It would serve best if You refrained from that. Each tangent You create that has to be answered diverts from the main topic of the Thread and drains patience. Why not start a Thread on What Ever You want?

We were a paper tiger under Clinton, granted sometimes doing nothing or waiting is the best course. Time unfolds things that would be missed with premature action. There were things about Bill I liked. He was a likable Guy, He is a likable Guy, but He made mistakes. Daddy Bush Made mistakes, GW lost it totally in the end, because of all of the ball breaking. On a good day Obama should learn to expect a ration of ball breaking just because of the last 8 years. Throw in Marxist tendencies, resentment to Constitutional Protections and Limitations, and It's play time. Threaten The Republic and things will change for the worse real fast. If You want further comment on that, start a Thread, and point Me there.

Obama Administration does not have the Trust of the Military Community, They feel more at risk, and hogtied. Why? You tell me? What kind of cause and effect has brought this into being? Visit Military.com and check out those boards. Every View Point is represented.

 

[Intense]

Where did you get that bubble of comfortable living by intellectual dishonesty? Our nation is responsible for hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded over the past 20 years in Iraq alone. What the ****? How do people so neatly carve out their own little tiny slices of peyote reality?

We were speaking of terrorists. If you want to talk about 'war', that is a totally different discussion. There have been those on this thread that want to equate 'a few' that have done terroristic violence with thousands that do terroristic violence on what seems, a daily basis in countries around the world. The extremists proclaim to want something and in places where that was granted (Pakistan, from India and some African nations), the terror did not stop, it escalated, and the demands have increased (kind of like libs).

That changes your framework and negates your own claim. If you want to compare the number of people killed by products of nations then you must factor equitably and not on a derivative scale that is composed of arbitrary pieces. For example, you wish to point out nations that are predominantly muslim produce more terrorists than Western nations. You are omitting several vital elements for the sole purpose of supporting a claim that is wholly circular.

Since the US is predominantly Christian and we are the only nation in the history of....everything we know....to use nukes on civilians that must mean Christianity is inherently prone to indiscriminately torching tens of thousands of innocents. That is the exact logic you're trying to employ to make unbelievably dishonest claims.

This argument belongs somewhere else. What part of that don't you get?

 

[Intense]

So since some of the "red flags" with hasan occured under W's watch and were not acted on am I to assume, based on your attempt to lay blame on the CIC that you are blaming bush for this? Or are you trying to claim that all of the "PC" crap that you are trying to lay at obama's feet occurred within the last 9+ months??
If that is your claim then could you please provide PROOF to back up your assertion?

My claim is rooted more in the culture, it does stem more from the Left though we see it on the Right too. The failure to profile for fear of Whom might be offended is carried too far. Government, Corporate, Social aspects cross the line of reason. I stumbled across AAAAAA and got a kick out of it, I love to hear Acronym Speak, so I included it. I respect the guy that came up with this one.

When We act by Reason and Conscience, We are at Out best. Contradictions and fear of consequence corrupt that. Collective Reason usually victimizes Projective Reason, when in conflict, the numbers dominate, not the truth, not justice. Mob Rule.

Could you please speak in plain English? Collective reason, projective reason? Who speaks that way in real life?

Sorry I misspoke there as well. Collective Reason V.S. Objective Reason.

When one needs to know how the Majority feels about an Issue before forming a decision, that is Collective. Sacrificing conflicting perspective to the group. Objective Reason is based on relevant Factors, not the influence of the group, Individual Perspective. There may circumstances where either is Justified and circumstances where either can bring hurt.

 

[CurveLight]

and yet there is NO proof of that opinion despite the author of this thread being asked to provide some MULTIPLE times. Imagine that.

Can you offer proof that ALL of the "red flags" occured only AFTER obama took office? If not then doesn't bush deserve a large part of the blame that you are trying to lay only at obama's feet?

Don't you get it yet? When they blamed 9E on Clinton because Dubya was in office for only 8 months they swore the logic was sound. However, they have had revelations since then and while they still don't blame Dubya they don't blame Clinton either so blaming Obama is logically consistent, free of hypocrisy, and places the welfare of our nation at the epicenter of their concern. When will you get off the partisan hackery and care more about America instead of a Party?!?

I think that when You speak for Yourself, You shine best. You do not however make the best spokes person for Our side. It would serve best if You refrained from that. Each tangent You create that has to be answered diverts from the main topic of the Thread and drains patience. Why not start a Thread on What Ever You want?

We were a paper tiger under Clinton, granted sometimes doing nothing or waiting is the best course. Time unfolds things that would be missed with premature action. There were things about Bill I liked. He was a likable Guy, He is a likable Guy, but He made mistakes. Daddy Bush Made mistakes, GW lost it totally in the end, because of all of the ball breaking. On a good day Obama should learn to expect a ration of ball breaking just because of the last 8 years. Throw in Marxist tendencies, resentment to Constitutional Protections and Limitations, and It's play time. Threaten The Republic and things will change for the worse real fast. If You want further comment on that, start a Thread, and point Me there.

Obama Administration does not have the Trust of the Military Community, They feel more at risk, and hogtied. Why? You tell me? What kind of cause and effect has brought this into being? Visit Military.com and check out those boards. Every View Point is represented.

You're wound up so ******* tight if you stood with your back against a brick wall you could suck out a single brick. I can't stand clinton dubya or obushama so your entire rant is a useless assumption. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy. If you want to waste time trying to defend it then have fun.

 

[CurveLight]

We were speaking of terrorists. If you want to talk about 'war', that is a totally different discussion. There have been those on this thread that want to equate 'a few' that have done terroristic violence with thousands that do terroristic violence on what seems, a daily basis in countries around the world. The extremists proclaim to want something and in places where that was granted (Pakistan, from India and some African nations), the terror did not stop, it escalated, and the demands have increased (kind of like libs).

That changes your framework and negates your own claim. If you want to compare the number of people killed by products of nations then you must factor equitably and not on a derivative scale that is composed of arbitrary pieces. For example, you wish to point out nations that are predominantly muslim produce more terrorists than Western nations. You are omitting several vital elements for the sole purpose of supporting a claim that is wholly circular.

Since the US is predominantly Christian and we are the only nation in the history of....everything we know....to use nukes on civilians that must mean Christianity is inherently prone to indiscriminately torching tens of thousands of innocents. That is the exact logic you're trying to employ to make unbelievably dishonest claims.

This argument belongs somewhere else. What part of that don't you get?

Guess you really didn't like the nukes/Christian analogy.

 

[Intense]

Don't you get it yet? When they blamed 9E on Clinton because Dubya was in office for only 8 months they swore the logic was sound. However, they have had revelations since then and while they still don't blame Dubya they don't blame Clinton either so blaming Obama is logically consistent, free of hypocrisy, and places the welfare of our nation at the epicenter of their concern. When will you get off the partisan hackery and care more about America instead of a Party?!?

I think that when You speak for Yourself, You shine best. You do not however make the best spokes person for Our side. It would serve best if You refrained from that. Each tangent You create that has to be answered diverts from the main topic of the Thread and drains patience. Why not start a Thread on What Ever You want?

We were a paper tiger under Clinton, granted sometimes doing nothing or waiting is the best course. Time unfolds things that would be missed with premature action. There were things about Bill I liked. He was a likable Guy, He is a likable Guy, but He made mistakes. Daddy Bush Made mistakes, GW lost it totally in the end, because of all of the ball breaking. On a good day Obama should learn to expect a ration of ball breaking just because of the last 8 years. Throw in Marxist tendencies, resentment to Constitutional Protections and Limitations, and It's play time. Threaten The Republic and things will change for the worse real fast. If You want further comment on that, start a Thread, and point Me there.

Obama Administration does not have the Trust of the Military Community, They feel more at risk, and hogtied. Why? You tell me? What kind of cause and effect has brought this into being? Visit Military.com and check out those boards. Every View Point is represented.

You're wound up so ******* tight if you stood with your back against a brick wall you could suck out a single brick. I can't stand clinton dubya or obushama so your entire rant is a useless assumption. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy. If you want to waste time trying to defend it then have fun.

Panties wound up in a bunch? Again? Rational thought has that effect on You huh? Rather than address the Issues You divert and attack. We live in a Republic where We have less influence of what happens, when, or how, by design. You should be used to it by now. You have voice, that You could direct better to express Your concerns. You waste it pissing into the wind. You are bad at answering questions, good at ignoring reality. When are You going to start that Thread, and stop diverting this one?

Here's Why The Media Denies it Was Terrorism?

I think too that the media serves an agenda and serves terrorism.
I propose two solutions.

First. Only real People can own Stocks and Bonds, No Corporate Holdings. No Corporations owning other Corporations. GE out of NBC is one tiny example.

Second. All Unions out of Government, at All levels. If Labor Laws fall short, repair them. Eventually Unions should disappear. You cannot serve two masters.

 

[drsmith1072]

Golly Gee Wizz is it OK to blame the CIC for the PC and the tone it creates? What Think You OP? Is the PC tone different under the DNC than it was under the RNC? Did the PC tone effect the Abilities involved? Was the DOD effected differently under DNC rule, or is this PC an excuse and are the RNC Hypocritical.

AAAAAA the Association for the Abolition of Abused Abbreviations and Asinine Acronyms
Military Acronyms, Initialisms, and Abbreviations

So since some of the "red flags" with hasan occured under W's watch and were not acted on am I to assume, based on your attempt to lay blame on the CIC that you are blaming bush for this? Or are you trying to claim that all of the "PC" crap that you are trying to lay at obama's feet occurred within the last 9+ months??
If that is your claim then could you please provide PROOF to back up your assertion?

My claim is rooted more in the culture, it does stem more from the Left though we see it on the Right too. The failure to profile for fear of Whom might be offended is carried too far. Government, Corporate, Social aspects cross the line of reason. I stumbled across AAAAAA and got a kick out of it, I love to hear Acronym Speak, so I included it. I respect the guy that came up with this one.

When We act by Reason and Conscience, We are at Out best. Contradictions and fear of consequence corrupt that. Collective Reason usually victimizes Objective Reason, when in conflict, the numbers dominate, not the truth, not justice. Mob Rule.

WOW, so am I to take it that you can't answer the questions I asked? Oh and that's nice spin and all but how does any of that justify the attempts blaming obama and his "new attitude" for something that began BEFORE he became president?? You tried to blame obama as did the OP and both failed to substantiate your claims.

It appears that you and many others are intent on blaming obama for this. However when faced with the FACT that it began before he took office you desperately try to spin and avoid applying the same standard to W. Why is that and how can you honestly blame obama and his "new attitude" for something that began BEFORE he took office?

 

[Intense]

That changes your framework and negates your own claim. If you want to compare the number of people killed by products of nations then you must factor equitably and not on a derivative scale that is composed of arbitrary pieces. For example, you wish to point out nations that are predominantly muslim produce more terrorists than Western nations. You are omitting several vital elements for the sole purpose of supporting a claim that is wholly circular.

Since the US is predominantly Christian and we are the only nation in the history of....everything we know....to use nukes on civilians that must mean Christianity is inherently prone to indiscriminately torching tens of thousands of innocents. That is the exact logic you're trying to employ to make unbelievably dishonest claims.

This argument belongs somewhere else. What part of that don't you get?

Guess you really didn't like the nukes/Christian analogy.

Not a problem, at all. Try starting that Thread and We will further discuss it.

 

[Intense]

So since some of the "red flags" with hasan occured under W's watch and were not acted on am I to assume, based on your attempt to lay blame on the CIC that you are blaming bush for this? Or are you trying to claim that all of the "PC" crap that you are trying to lay at obama's feet occurred within the last 9+ months??
If that is your claim then could you please provide PROOF to back up your assertion?

My claim is rooted more in the culture, it does stem more from the Left though we see it on the Right too. The failure to profile for fear of Whom might be offended is carried too far. Government, Corporate, Social aspects cross the line of reason. I stumbled across AAAAAA and got a kick out of it, I love to hear Acronym Speak, so I included it. I respect the guy that came up with this one.

When We act by Reason and Conscience, We are at Out best. Contradictions and fear of consequence corrupt that. Collective Reason usually victimizes Objective Reason, when in conflict, the numbers dominate, not the truth, not justice. Mob Rule.

WOW, so am I to take it that you can't answer the questions I asked? Oh and that's nice spin and all but how does any of that justify the attempts blaming obama and his "new attitude" for something that began BEFORE he became president?? You tried to blame obama as did the OP and both failed to substantiate your claims.

It appears that you and many others are intent on blaming obama for this. However when faced with the FACT that it began before he took office you desperately try to spin and avoid applying the same standard to W. Why is that and how can you honestly blame obama and his "new attitude" for something that began BEFORE he took office?

I do answer Your question Doc, You just don't like the result. I do blame Obama for being part of the problem, same with Bush. To blame them for the origin of a philosophy of manipulating opinion and thought, that existed before They were born , is silly.

Obama's Show is different from the Bush Show, He is responsible for the effects of current policies, even if in name only.

 

[CurveLight]

This argument belongs somewhere else. What part of that don't you get?

Guess you really didn't like the nukes/Christian analogy.

Not a problem, at all. Try starting that Thread and We will further discuss it.

You sound like a spoiled little girl.

 

[Intense]

Guess you really didn't like the nukes/Christian analogy.

Not a problem, at all. Try starting that Thread and We will further discuss it.

You sound like a spoiled little girl.

No, spoiled little girls are my kryptonite. I have no defense and am surrounded.

Do You need help starting a Thread? What Title would you give it.

 

[drsmith1072]

My claim is rooted more in the culture, it does stem more from the Left though we see it on the Right too. The failure to profile for fear of Whom might be offended is carried too far. Government, Corporate, Social aspects cross the line of reason. I stumbled across AAAAAA and got a kick out of it, I love to hear Acronym Speak, so I included it. I respect the guy that came up with this one.

When We act by Reason and Conscience, We are at Out best. Contradictions and fear of consequence corrupt that. Collective Reason usually victimizes Objective Reason, when in conflict, the numbers dominate, not the truth, not justice. Mob Rule.

WOW, so am I to take it that you can't answer the questions I asked? Oh and that's nice spin and all but how does any of that justify the attempts blaming obama and his "new attitude" for something that began BEFORE he became president?? You tried to blame obama as did the OP and both failed to substantiate your claims.

It appears that you and many others are intent on blaming obama for this. However when faced with the FACT that it began before he took office you desperately try to spin and avoid applying the same standard to W. Why is that and how can you honestly blame obama and his "new attitude" for something that began BEFORE he took office?

I do answer Your question Doc, You just don't like the result. I do blame Obama for being part of the problem, same with Bush. To blame them for the origin of a philosophy of manipulating opinion and thought, that existed before They were born , is silly.

Obama's Show is different from the Bush Show, He is responsible for the effects of current policies, even if in name only.

Uh NO you didn't. I asked

So since some of the "red flags" with hasan occured under W's watch and were not acted on am I to assume, based on your attempt to lay blame on the CIC that you are blaming bush for this?

and

Or are you trying to claim that all of the "PC" crap that you are trying to lay at obama's feet occurred within the last 9+ months??
If that is your claim then could you please provide PROOF to back up your assertion?

and you failed to answer either directly and only provided spin in a desperate and failed attempt attempt to justify your claim without providing proof of the underlying claims.

ok spinmaster wannabe NO ONE is blaming them for "the origin of the philosophy." That is merely an obvious dodge on your part because you refuse to admit the FACT that the PC attitude that you are trying to lay ONLY at obamas feet CONCERNING hasan began under W watch. The fact is that you and others are trying to blame obama and his new attitude for hasan's red flags being missed due to political correctness when the FACT is that his red flags began BEFORE obama was president and therefore CANNOT be blamed on obama and his "new attitude" as was claimed in the OP. So please stop spinning and stay on the facts of the topic if you can.

You tried to spin and deflect and YOU FAILED.

Oh and can you also answer this question since you avoided it too?

how can you honestly blame obama and his "new attitude" for something that began BEFORE he took office

 

[Intense]

WOW, so am I to take it that you can't answer the questions I asked? Oh and that's nice spin and all but how does any of that justify the attempts blaming obama and his "new attitude" for something that began BEFORE he became president?? You tried to blame obama as did the OP and both failed to substantiate your claims.

It appears that you and many others are intent on blaming obama for this. However when faced with the FACT that it began before he took office you desperately try to spin and avoid applying the same standard to W. Why is that and how can you honestly blame obama and his "new attitude" for something that began BEFORE he took office?

I do answer Your question Doc, You just don't like the result. I do blame Obama for being part of the problem, same with Bush. To blame them for the origin of a philosophy of manipulating opinion and thought, that existed before They were born , is silly.

Obama's Show is different from the Bush Show, He is responsible for the effects of current policies, even if in name only.

Uh NO you didn't. I asked

So since some of the "red flags" with hasan occured under W's watch and were not acted on am I to assume, based on your attempt to lay blame on the CIC that you are blaming bush for this?

and

Or are you trying to claim that all of the "PC" crap that you are trying to lay at obama's feet occurred within the last 9+ months??
If that is your claim then could you please provide PROOF to back up your assertion?

and you failed to answer either directly and only provided spin in a desperate and failed attempt attempt to justify your claim without providing proof of the underlying claims.

ok spinmaster wannabe NO ONE is blaming them for "the origin of the philosophy." That is merely an obvious dodge on your part because you refuse to admit the FACT that the PC attitude that you are trying to lay ONLY at obamas feet CONCERNING hasan began under W watch. The fact is that you and others are trying to blame obama and his new attitude for hasan's red flags being missed due to political correctness when the FACT is that his red flags began BEFORE obama was president and therefore CANNOT be blamed on obama and his "new attitude" as was claimed in the OP. So please stop spinning and stay on the facts of the topic if you can.

You tried to spin and deflect and YOU FAILED.

Oh and can you also answer this question since you avoided it too?

how can you honestly blame obama and his "new attitude" for something that began BEFORE he took office

I personally think that You have been captive too long. You need to purge the toxins.
I am not spinning or deflecting. You are missing the point and denying the symptoms.

Obama is at fault, the responsibility comes with the Job.
Bush is at Fault, Integrity should not be compromised, it is a corruption.
Reality V.S. Spin is ancient. It is a part of Human Nature.

Objective Reality falls victim to the angry mob, more often than not. To play, You must renounce your own perception. The Individual Victim of the Collective. Sorry Charlie, The bottomless pit.