Obama Whistleblower article

[Aces_Full]

https://www.google.com/amp/www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/07/06/willful-blindness/amp/#

Hope link works. Doing this from phone. It's a pretty disturbing article written by a former member of the Dept of Homeland Security. Brings into question the morals of the individuals running this country to say the least.

 

[Seattle Husker]

https://www.google.com/amp/www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/07/06/willful-blindness/amp/#

Hope link works. Doing this from phone. It's a pretty disturbing article written by a former member of the Dept of Homeland Security. Brings into question the morals of the individuals running this country to say the least.

Breitbart? If this "former member of the Dept of Homeland Security" didn't pick such a slanted platform I might read it. I'd say the same thing if this was coming from the DailyBeast, Townhall, etc.

 

[Crockett]

I followed the link. Basically a recitation of the political point that only if we call it "Radical Islamic Terrorism" then we'll be able to fight it. I guess if we start using the term Obama refuses to say, that which will not be named will shrivel up like a vampire in the afternoon sun or at least be chastened like when the knights who say "Nay" repeated the phrase in Monty Python's Holy Grail.

 

[I35]

"Radical Islamic Terrorism"

I don't know why it's so hard to say it by some. It's the right description. They are Islamic, they are Radical, and they are Terrorist. I'm guessing BHO wouldn't have a problem calling it "Radical Christian Terrorism" if Christians were chopping off Heads of Muslims for not believing in Christianity.

 

[Seattle Husker]

I don't know why it's so hard to say it by some. It's the right description. They are Islamic, they are Radical, and they are Terrorist. I'm guessing BHO wouldn't have a problem calling it "Radical Christian Terrorism" if Christians were chopping off Heads of Muslims for not believing in Christianity.

I'd guess the opposite if the risk is the branding of Christians and a global religious war.

 

[Horns11]

I'm guessing BHO wouldn't have a problem calling it "Radical Christian Terrorism" if Christians were chopping off Heads of Muslims for not believing in Christianity.

What did Charlemagne call it 1200 years ago when he was sponsoring it?

This is exactly what it looks like. A retiree is getting his 2 cents out there before he goes and sits at his ranch, waiting for the media requests to pour in. He's basically complaining about semantics, and not just any semantics, but semantic requests that were recommended by bipartisan groups. Things that seem pretty common sense, too.

 

[iatrogenic]

What did Charlemagne call it 1200 years ago when he was sponsoring it?

Survival.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Survival.

That's a bit much, don't you think? It's been stated many times before, the odds of being involved in a terror attack in the US are astronomically small. Were I to worry about that I'd be in fear to drive to and from work each day.

 

[iatrogenic]

That's a bit much, don't you think? It's been stated many times before, the odds of being involved in a terror attack in the US are astronomically small. Were I to worry about that I'd be in fear to drive to and from work each day.

There was no U.S. 1200 years ago.

The odds will increase as time marches on if we don't take steps now to stop this problem. There will be many generations after us that will either thank us for doing something, or curse us for letting this problem grow.

 

[I35]

That's a bit much, don't you think? It's been stated many times before, the odds of being involved in a terror attack in the US are astronomically small. Were I to worry about that I'd be in fear to drive to and from work each day.

Do you really think it's just about us? About the present? You should be even more fearful for our kids, grandkids and great grandkids at the rate we're going. Bringing in refugees from that region speeds up their process.

 

[ProdigalHorn]

I'd guess the opposite if the risk is the branding of Christians and a global religious war.

How many "Christian" churches, leaders or groups are actively supporting terrorists acts? How many people this past year were killed while someone shouted "Jesus is Lord"? You can make all kinds of arguments about what people do who also happen to be Christian, but there is a huge difference between doing something that is contrary to your religious belief and doing something because your religious leaders or institutions are promoting or condoning it.

 

[Seattle Husker]

How many "Christian" churches, leaders or groups are actively supporting terrorists acts? How many people this past year were killed while someone shouted "Jesus is Lord"? You can make all kinds of arguments about what people do who also happen to be Christian, but there is a huge difference between doing something that is contrary to your religious belief and doing something because your religious leaders or institutions are promoting or condoning it.

That's my point. The inference above was the Obama was treating Muslims differently than he would if it were Christians. This is the tired trope about spurred on by the belief that Obama is a Muslim (worst) or Muslim sympathizer (at best). Were the shoe on the other foot, I don't think he would. The language he's choosing to use is to stem the escalation where a iaotrogic (sp?) appears to think escalation is unavoidable thus we should escalate first.

 

[Clean]

The article wasn't just about the semantics of what to called terrorists, it was also about the fact that the Obama Administration's policies were shaped by committees that included people that were linked to groups that support Hamas and therefore support terrorism. Some of the committee members had even made statements that seem to openly advocate for violence and yet, Obama put them on committees to craft the U.S.'s response to violence. Go figure.

 

[Seattle Husker]

The article wasn't just about the semantics of what to called terrorists, it was also about the fact that the Obama Administration's policies were shaped by committees that included people that were linked to groups that support Hamas and therefore support terrorism. Some of the committee members had even made statements that seem to openly advocate for violence and yet, Obama put them on committees to craft the U.S.'s response to violence. Go figure.

So, it was a full on conspiracy theory espoused on a rightwing blog? No thanks. There's better use of my time.

 

[iatrogenic]

That's my point. The inference above was the Obama was treating Muslims differently than he would if it were Christians. This is the tired trope about spurred on by the belief that Obama is a Muslim (worst) or Muslim sympathizer (at best). Were the shoe on the other foot, I don't think he would. The language he's choosing to use is to stem the escalation where a iaotrogic (sp?) appears to think escalation is unavoidable thus we should escalate first.

I don't want to escalate. I think we should wait until we lose at least 3,000 people in , say, an attack using airliners to slam into the World Trade Center, you ******* dip ****.

 

[Seattle Husker]

I don't want to escalate. I think we should wait until we lose at least 3,000 people in , say, an attack using airliners to slam into the World Trade Center, you ******* dip ****.

We've used that to start 2 wars, 1 that was questionable. 100k civilians are already dead. Yes, you do want to escalate further. Name-calling doesn't make your point any less outrageous.

 

[iatrogenic]

The term is descriptive, not a name.

 

[Seattle Husker]

The term is descriptive, not a name.

I choose to be more rational. The methods you propose are not feasible. If you believe they are, you likely believe that it's possible to deport 13M illegal immigrants from the US too.

We tried the neo-con approach and look where it got us. Radical Islam entrenched around the world. Just because I'm not ready to punish 1.6B people for the action of 19 hijackers and a support network I'm a "*******"? I can only the heavy hand you used with your children when they acted up.

 

[iatrogenic]

You have no answers. Your M.O., like most Democrats, is to criticize conservatives and cry about the "wealth" gap, which is not a problem.

 

[Seattle Husker]

You have no answers. Your M.O., like most Democrats, is to criticize conservatives and cry about the "wealth" gap, which is not a problem.

Sorry, I didn't realize you were expecting solutions to all of the problems. If you were expecting a black/white response then I'm not your man. The world is gray. Pointing out that the problems go deeper than simply "blacks need to show more respect" was what I thought was the start of a discussion. Rather, you want to paint a predetermined picture regardless of the materials.

BTW- Where did you offer solutions?

 

[iatrogenic]

The world is gray.

Yes, decision making is tough. I'm guessing you work for someone else.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Yes, decision making is tough. I'm guessing you work for someone else.

Nah, I don't take well to know-it-alls either though. My team is pretty loyal to me though since I respect and consider their opinions when making decisions.