Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Wait wait... So u are a truther?

Quote:Look... whether or not Hillary should be in jail is debatable. Whether or not she should be the POTUS shouldn't be. Her actions should not be tolerated by the American public, and yet her liberal fans just look the other way and shower her with praise because she vehemently sticks up for a woman's right to murder their unborn baby.

 

I think the problem is, people on both sides of the aisle no longer trust the press, and they definitely don't trust the other side to tell the truth about anything.   So they consider the source, and just tune out the negative stuff if they don't like it.   All the negative stuff about Hillary Clinton is coming from Republicans, and Republican sources like Fox News.   So most people just tune it out. 

 

The election will come down to philosophy.   Scandals don't seem to have any impact any more. 

 

While she was Secretary of State, Hillary made a mistake and someone got killed for it, and she tried to spin her way out of it.   That's just not enough to overcome the difference in philosophy between Republicans and Democrats.   To you, this Benghazi incident confirms your pre-existing narrative about Hillary Clinton and what kind of person she is.   But the other half of the country doesn't have the same pre-existing negative opinion about Hillary Clinton.   So this Benghazi incident doesn't register the same way.   And they tune it out, because they don't trust Republicans  and they don't trust the conservative-leaning elements of the press that keeps talking about Benghazi. 

Quote:Wait wait... So u are a truther?

Not really. Truthers believe that some combination of Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld actively caused 9/11 by ordering the US government to bomb the towers. I prefer not to believe that we attacked ourselves, but I do think that the Executive Branch knew exactly what was coming and chose to let it occur.

This is the amazing thing. Before the 2000 election "Bush is too stupid. He didnt know the name of this obscure dictator." then it became "bush is an evil genius thar is playing geopolitical 3d chess."


I suppose the clinton administration was part of the ruse by not accepting bin laden from the sudan. Now thas bipartisanship!

Clinton bears a great deal of the blame for the current mess for not taking care of Bin Laden when he had the chance. As I recall, the Cole bombing happened on his watch.

Quote:This is the amazing thing. Before the 2000 election "Bush is too stupid. He didnt know the name of this obscure dictator." then it became "bush is an evil genius thar is playing geopolitical 3d chess."

I suppose the clinton administration was part of the ruse by not accepting bin laden from the sudan. Now thas bipartisanship!

I doubt the chimpanzee in office had much of anything to do with. Dick might have told him "we are going to do something big; you will know it when it happens, just follow my lead." Hence the "my god they really did it" look on his face in the classroom that day.

And he and the clintons discussed it during the transition huh?

Quote:And he and the clintons discussed it during the transition huh?

Show me proof that the Clintons knew that Al Qaeda was preparing a major attack on American soil and did nothing about it, and you've got a leg to stand on. Until you're able to pull that up, all we know is that the Bush administration knew that Al Qaeda was preparing a major attack on American soil and did nothing about it.

Bill clinton in his own words admitted to not Bin Laden when he knew he was planning attacks against the homeland.


This is a case of credible intel and a means to do something about it. The problem was demonstorable in the doctrine of fighting terror as a legal extension of law enforcement for a general crime instead of treating the coonspirators as combatants in wae. This is playing out with the unilateral releasing if detainees from gitmo that we KNOW will kill americans.


In the case of 911, you have a situation where two dozen people hid in a population of 300 million and used unsophisticated tools that wouldnt have inherently led to the diagnosis of a terror plot.


Criticism of the administration that was still functionally in a state of transitioning to its full team being in place is based almost soley in hindsight.


As it relates to benghazi you had a singular threat to a location known to be a high value target with previous acts of terror in the region not to mention the fact that the administration had just initiated a policy of regime change and you would anricipate sectarian and terrorist activity in the vaccuum.


You also have verifiable common sense steps that could have been and should have been implimented. These common sense steps werent taken because an increase in security or the outright withdrawl of the ambassador would have undermined the administrations reelection bid based on the idea tgat al queda was decimated.


There is no reasonable objective comparison between 911 and benghazi

Quote:There is no reasonable objective comparison between 911 and benghazi

If your agenda is to try Hillary Clinton for war crimes, no, there isn't. If your intent is to point out that the far right wants to burn Hillary at the stake while hanging her from the highest tree while the Bush administration got away with quietly allowing 3,000 Americans to be murdered so they could effectively murder thousands more to pad their personal fortunes, sure there is.

Quote:This is the amazing thing. Before Since the 2000 election "Bush is too stupid. He didnt know the name of this obscure dictator." then it became "bush is an evil genius thar is playing geopolitical 3d chess."


I suppose the clinton administration was part of the ruse by not accepting bin laden from the sudan. Now thas bipartisanship!

Fixed

Riddle me this tj. How did dick cheynne get sadamm to go along with the plan? What kind of srock options work at the end of a rope?

Quote:If your agenda is to try Hillary Clinton for war crimes, no, there isn't. If your intent is to point out that the far right wants to burn Hillary at the stake while hanging her from the highest tree while the Bush administration got away with quietly allowing 3,000 Americans to be murdered so they could effectively murder thousands more to pad their personal fortunes, sure there is.

You really are a truther.

Quote:Riddle me this tj. How did [BAD WORD REMOVED] cheynne get sadamm to go along with the plan? What kind of srock options work at the end of a rope?

How exactly did Hussein go along with the plan? All he had to do was sit back and wait to be invaded.

He refused inspections and defied the international community. That was the basis of the un resolution and authorization of force. If he allowed un inspections and complied with un directives tgere would have been no resolutions and no invaaion.

Quote:Not really. Truthers believe that some combination of Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld actively caused 9/11 by ordering the US government to bomb the towers. I prefer not to believe that we attacked ourselves, but I do think that the Executive Branch knew exactly what was coming and chose to let it occur.

Quote:Clinton bears a great deal of the blame for the current mess for not taking care of Bin Laden when he had the chance. As I recall, the Cole bombing happened on his watch.

 

You actually have to go back further into history to look at what was happening.  Study a bit the Iranian Guard back in the 1960's - 1970's.  What were they all about?  You had the political leader of Iran (the Shah) moving the country towards being more "westernized" and "modern".  You then had a group that became radicalized and followed their particular leader who was the Ayatollah (Khomeini at that point).  They saw a country that needed to be in-line with their religious/political beliefs.  They were brutal and fought for what is now known as sharia law.  Out of this "revolution" as they characterized it, other groups were formed which later would include such names as Al Quieda, Hammas and eventually ISIS as well as many others.

 

The thing is, you have to remember the time frame.  The internet was in it's infancy and the only real intelligence was human.  Cell phones were still a "new" piece of technology.  There really wasn't an electronic way to detect what was coming, nor was there any human intelligence that would have pointed to something like that (the 9/11 attack).

I remember when 241 Americans were killed in the Beruit embassy by two Hezbollah truck bombs after Robert McFarlane had requested of Ronald Reagan for more security or removal of the personnel there which he denied and nothing ever became of that.

 

This is just how the world, and U.S. politics works. If one side can grab a stone to throw they will do so.

 

Regards...............the Chiefjag

Quote:He refused inspections and defied the international community. That was the basis of the un resolution and authorization of force. If he allowed un inspections and complied with un directives tgere would have been no resolutions and no invaaion.

What you describe here could also be grounds for putting boots in Iran, but that never happened. The reason we were given for going in was WMDs. It was a lie. And nobody spent tens of millions of dollars questioning him about it.

Quote:It was a lie the consensus of every intelligence organization on Earth at the time. 

 

FTFY.

Check your facts.