ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Posts: 27150
May 12 13 2:28 PM
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~
Interact
May 12 13 8:28 PM
icepick wrote:Benghazi:the latest in inconvenient truths:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324244304578473533965297330.html?mod=us_most_pop_newsreel This story has now broken in the lamestream media, and it is too big for them to allow to die like they attempted to do previously. Fox News, the bane of every liberal in the USA, is the new Washington Post, and Benghazi has become the Watergate of the 21st Century. What's more upsetting than the story, is the attitude of liberals you will find in the comments. Their willingness to forgive Obama for this blatant disregard for American lives, his many lies throughout his presidency, and their attempts to shift the blame to the Republicans, is nothing short of amazing. They sound like they would actually prefer for this story to go back under the rug, and Obama to continue on with an administration steeped in lies. Yes, many politicians have lied to us before. Where the difference lies with Obama, is in the total absence of ANY truth since the very start. If you were wondering why I keep saying a civil war is coming in America, wonder no more. The division between the left and right in America has become a bottomless chasm, and those digging it all reside on the left. The political left has no interest what so ever in compromising in this nation. They want it all, and are willing to do anything to achieve it. One other breaking piece of this story, some of us will find ironically humorous. The administration is upset about the Republicans wanting their emails regarding Benghazi. They say that they have already seen them, and they have no right to use them in this case.http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/boehner-benghazi-obama-cover-up/2013/05/09/id/503651?s=al&promo_code=136F2-1 I'm not sure if that's the correct link or not, but it will get the point across. Oh really? I suppose they believe something quaint? Like an email should be respected as private or something? Strange how the political left is suddenly crying foul now that the other shoe has dropped, is it not?
It looks to me that Messrs. Hicks, Thompson and Nordstrom lives may be in danger….. Thank God they have had the courage to stand up against these political criminals! Because that is what they really are….. not even sending help for their own people, even if they could not have made it in time…. It’s absolutely abhorrent. You can imagine how the ambassador and staff felt when they realised that their own people were going to let them be slaughtered.
If Obama and other white house officials have nothing to hide then they should release the emails…. After all they want to read all our emails, and they want to hear all our phone calls, yet they can’t be scrutinized too? They are the ones that should be scrutinized….because they were voted in as servants of the people and have a duty to the people!
May 12 13 8:34 PM
icepick wrote:I don't know Pen ............ well of course it does. I'm just momentarily lost thinking about this. They actually could have said anything about a downward spiral and nailed it. Yes, it definitely fits, and it fits well. But do we want to set our minds in this mode? Things are getting to be so bad now that I'm dying to literally spray positive energy. But would anybody even sense it? There has to be a way to break this cycle, does there not? The Devil already has his due in my opinion. Let's try spreading happy thoughts when we're on other sites. Is anybody game? Tim
May 12 13 8:40 PM
icepick wrote:The Benghazi whistle blower has now been demoted, and reassigned:http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/benghazi-whistleblower-reassigned/2013/05/10/id/503941?s=al&promo_code=1374E-1 Is anybody even slightly surprised? Besides the fact that they are still alive of course.
Posts: 14359
May 13 13 7:36 AM
PeacefulSwannie wrote:icepick wrote:I don't know Pen ............ well of course it does. I'm just momentarily lost thinking about this. They actually could have said anything about a downward spiral and nailed it. Yes, it definitely fits, and it fits well. But do we want to set our minds in this mode? Things are getting to be so bad now that I'm dying to literally spray positive energy. But would anybody even sense it? There has to be a way to break this cycle, does there not? The Devil already has his due in my opinion. Let's try spreading happy thoughts when we're on other sites. Is anybody game? Tim Hi Tim The only two sites I have posted on the past nearly 10 years or so is CB and here, and I no longer post at CB.... I visit many sites though and do not post.... I read instead. Its very hard to break a cycle, when there are so many not listening....literally millions and millions not listening. If I could I would spray as much love as I could.... because love seems sorely lacking in this Age. Pen
May 13 13 8:38 AM
May 13 13 1:35 PM
Hi Pen; From the first moment you told me about this Hindu concept, I knew there was truth to it. I also knew it had some sort of flaw, but I could not determine what it might be. Don't ask me how, because I can't say. It's one of those things you instinctively know for some reason. Well, it came to me earlier today. And this may be due to a piece of knowledge the Hindus lacked. Lacked in the same way that the armies of Rama showed up on Elephants when it was nuked. We are no longer in the Iron Age. We are living in the Atomic Age. Apparently not having knowledge of the atom burned them twice. But were they the only ones to get burned? There is obvious truth to this concept, because the downward spiral is far too apparent. So what would an additional age mean under this context? I don't care to think of ................ the obvious one, because I don't care for the sound of that. You are more the resident expert here than I. What do you see as the natural ramifications of such a smooth transition to the dawn of a new age under those guidelines the Hindus laid out? Are we really doomed to live out an entire age without love or virtue? Is this part of the reason why Jesus will have to come back on a rescue mission? What is the reality of this truth once you insert the missing piece (age). Is this something that was hidden from the Hindus because it had to be kept secret? Do you have any ideas here? At this point I'm all ears. Anything we can bounce back and forth off each other? I think we should give it a try at the very least.
Hindus believe that sometimes a god will appear on the earth in living form.Such an appearance is called an avatar. Perhaps the best English translation of avatar is 'incarnation', however avatar also conveys the belief that God has the ability to take any form and will descend to earth at times when there has been a decline in goodness, and evil is influencing human actions.For whenever the law of righteousness (dharma)Withers away, and lawlessness (adharma) raises its head,Then do I generate myself on earthFor the protection of the good,For the destruction of evildoersFor the setting up of righteousnessI come into being, age after age.Bhagavad Gita, 4: 7 - 8 http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/rs/god/hinduismrev2.shtml
Hindus believe that sometimes a god will appear on the earth in living form.
Such an appearance is called an avatar. Perhaps the best English translation of avatar is 'incarnation', however avatar also conveys the belief that God has the ability to take any form and will descend to earth at times when there has been a decline in goodness, and evil is influencing human actions.
For whenever the law of righteousness (dharma)Withers away, and lawlessness (adharma) raises its head,Then do I generate myself on earthFor the protection of the good,For the destruction of evildoersFor the setting up of righteousnessI come into being, age after age.Bhagavad Gita, 4: 7 - 8 http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/rs/god/hinduismrev2.shtml
Bhagavad Gita, 4: 7 - 8
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/rs/god/hinduismrev2.shtml
May 13 13 3:55 PM
icepick wrote:Hi Pen; I can see a lot of problems facing the investigators, and they are large enough to require extreme caution. If they go too far, and uncover the wrong things in the process (which I feel they should no matter what), they could upset the balance of power on the planet. Now while I believe that may simply be a consequence of our lack of diligence, I also think we should stop to consider the consequences should America be removed from that power balance. What type of regimes would be left as the major powers? And here is why I'm thinking like this. If some of the things I suspect do come to light, we will be placed in the unenviable position of dressing a president in orange, and shipping him off to the Hague to stand trial for war crimes against humanity. They are the place where they do that now, are they not? If they do uncover this type of crime, and we both know they are there to discover, then the only proper actions would be to either ship him (and all accomplices) out, or try him ourselves. I do believe the latter would be more of a formality, because the Geneva Convention probably requires the World Court to try all war criminals. I am suspicious that he is already in violation of the convention because of one particular definition he had redefined to validate the drone attacks. Yes, he has taken the one step that Bush knew better about. He had the definition of a terrorist broadened to include everybody of military age in a war zone. Pretty arrogant of him/them, was it not? What would the consequences of that be? I've been running them through my head for days now, and have yet to see a good conclusion. That alone prevents me from coming out and saying so be it, but that will probably be my position in any case. If we followed the proper course of action, I don't think it would take long for America to regain respect in the world. But if we uncover things and do not ............. ? I pray that this will not impede the progress of any investigation. McCain in particular would probably be eager to ship him off in that case. His experience in the Hanoi Hilton should be more than enough to make him demand it. I am prepared for any eventuality myself, but what about the Democrats? Would the obvious damage it would do to their party make them fight something like this tooth and nail? If I were among their ranks, I would be ready to change parties myself. As for those who do not believe something like this could happen, I suggest they get a life, and get real. America won't fight a war to protect a president who tried to take her down once he's totally exposed. I am in total agreement with you regarding the hero status of the whistle blowers. They were probably raised in a manner which left them no choice, but it still took a lot of courage to step forward. Their position is not one of envy. Of course Holy Wood will change that once it's time for movie and book deals (you don't think they'll sell out their ideals if money is to be made?), but right now I'm sure they are being presented some very bleak visions of their futures. The bottom line is that if they can uncover evidence to incriminate the man (that hasn't been destroyed), he should be promptly impeached, and formally charged. We should also charge him for any damages the consequences of his actions will do to America, and reserve the right to punish him before he is sent to the world court, unless the crime is one that requires a blindfold and a cigarette. We are at war after all, as I don't recall any surrender or armistice taking place. I think this may be the reason he tried to personally declare the war over a year or two back. He may have foreseen the possibility of this happening back then. If so, that's just too damn bad. It only means that he knew the possible consequences of his actions before he took them. And what does his offering aid to an enemy of America in those (Al Qaeda) Syrian Rebels mean? Giving aid to the enemy in a time of war? I can guarantee you this is why McCain is pushing him to take the leap now that they have formally merged. Once he aids them in substantial fashion, they've got him. Have you wondered why he started pussy footing that issue? Well wonder no more. The man is in a corner. I noticed that the lady who wrote the Benghazi article echoed a sentiment of mine. How much contempt would a person have to hold the American people in to lie to them continually like he has done? In my opinion, that alone should be enough to remove the man from office. If not, there are the multiple times he has blatantly broken his oath of office in full public view. The man could be impeached long before Benghazi is investigated and addressed. In my opinion that would be best. It would be much easier to go after a president who has already been removed from office in disgrace for crimes he should inevitably face. A sitting president might actually skate on some of them. That's what I fear anyway. It would send one clear message to any future president with power grabbing ideas as well. Tim
Posts: 1814
May 13 13 4:59 PM
icepick wrote:MOKSHA wrote:Me being a observer of all this DO<>DO, has to be a reason for all this crazy activity. From 1983 http://www.brasschecktv.com/videos/news-media-corruption-1/congressman-larry-mcdonald-.html who is this guy http://www.brasschecktv.com/videos/obama-watch-1/who-the-heck-is-barack-obama-.html Hi MOKSHA. The worst thing about Barry Boy is the way he has hidden his true self. We have a definite right to know who it is sitting in that chair. Tim
MOKSHA wrote:Me being a observer of all this DO<>DO, has to be a reason for all this crazy activity. From 1983 http://www.brasschecktv.com/videos/news-media-corruption-1/congressman-larry-mcdonald-.html who is this guy http://www.brasschecktv.com/videos/obama-watch-1/who-the-heck-is-barack-obama-.html
May 13 13 11:00 PM
May 13 13 11:27 PM
May 14 13 6:05 AM
icepick wrote:Hi MOKSHA; I will take yours first, because I can sense the answers a bit better. Benghazi is worse than 9/11, because everybody, including the president, Tim That is enough for me TIM if that's is what you think I will politely remove myself from any further relations thanks for your imput
May 14 13 6:07 AM
May 15 13 12:19 AM
MOKSHA wrote:goodbye
May 15 13 7:35 AM
May 15 13 2:31 PM
May 16 13 10:52 PM
The White House on Wednesday released 94 pages of emails between top administration and intelligence officials who helped shape the talking points about the attacks in Benghazi, Libya, that the CIA would provide to policymakers in both the legislative and executive branches.The documents, first reported by THE WEEKLY STANDARD in articles here and here, directly contradict claims by White House press secretary Jay Carney and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the revisions of those talking points were driven by the intelligence community and show heavy input from top Obama administration officials, particularly those at the State Department. The emails provide further detail about the rewriting of the talking points during a 24-hour period from midday September 14 to midday September 15. As THE WEEKLY STANDARD previously reported, a briefing from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence shows that the big changes came in three waves – internally at the CIA, after email feedback from top administration officials, and during or after a meeting of high-ranking intelligence and national security officials the following morning.
The White House on Wednesday released 94 pages of emails between top administration and intelligence officials who helped shape the talking points about the attacks in Benghazi, Libya, that the CIA would provide to policymakers in both the legislative and executive branches.
The documents, first reported by THE WEEKLY STANDARD in articles here and here, directly contradict claims by White House press secretary Jay Carney and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the revisions of those talking points were driven by the intelligence community and show heavy input from top Obama administration officials, particularly those at the State Department.
The emails provide further detail about the rewriting of the talking points during a 24-hour period from midday September 14 to midday September 15. As THE WEEKLY STANDARD previously reported, a briefing from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence shows that the big changes came in three waves – internally at the CIA, after email feedback from top administration officials, and during or after a meeting of high-ranking intelligence and national security officials the following morning.
Read more @ http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/newly-released-benghazi-emails-directly-contradict-white-house-claims_724603.html
May 17 13 11:45 AM
May 17 13 11:56 AM
PeacefulSwannie wrote:Benghazi Emails Directly Contradict White House ClaimsThe White House on Wednesday released 94 pages of emails between top administration and intelligence officials who helped shape the talking points about the attacks in Benghazi, Libya, that the CIA would provide to policymakers in both the legislative and executive branches.The documents, first reported by THE WEEKLY STANDARD in articles here and here, directly contradict claims by White House press secretary Jay Carney and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the revisions of those talking points were driven by the intelligence community and show heavy input from top Obama administration officials, particularly those at the State Department. The emails provide further detail about the rewriting of the talking points during a 24-hour period from midday September 14 to midday September 15. As THE WEEKLY STANDARD previously reported, a briefing from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence shows that the big changes came in three waves – internally at the CIA, after email feedback from top administration officials, and during or after a meeting of high-ranking intelligence and national security officials the following morning. Read more @ http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/newly-released-benghazi-emails-directly-contradict-white-house-claims_724603.html
May 17 13 1:36 PM
Yep! They were finally caught wading knee deep in their lies Pen. To let MOKSHA know I did not miss his point, I would like to pose the question of what exactly has this administration been trying to pull?
And maybe ask a few more things, starting with why our armed forces have been reluctant to obey their CIC? Why has the Obama Administration pushed so hard for voter registration ON THE ABSENTEE BALLOT only? And what have they been using to continually get nothing but good press in America when no administration since JFK has received such kid glove treatment?
Methinks somebody worked overtime creating an image which is not correct. Why was one of the first things Obama did was to make certain that information regarding his past was sealed? I doubt that such an act is even legal for a candidate. If it is, it should not be. I wonder what would get found out if they were to thoroughly investigate the administration? With any luck at all, they will find grounds to do so eh?