Hypocricy Part 2

Search

"My Other Vehicle Is a Locomotive"
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
1,797
Tokens
Prior to Benghazi, were there 13 attacks on embassies and 60 deaths under President George W. Bush?


By Louis Jacobson on Monday, May 12th, 2014 at 5:23 p.m.




Police officers examine a damaged pickup outside the United States consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, on June 14, 2002. A suicide attacker crashed a bomb-laden car into a guard post, killing at least seven and leaving at least 25 others injured.
As the U.S. House of Representatives was readying a new special committee to investigate the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, many Democrats were arguing that continuing to probe the Sept. 11, 2012, attack -- which killed four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens -- amounted to a political witch hunt.


On May 5, 2014, Rep. John Garamendi, D-Calif., told MSNBC host Ed Schultz that there has already been exhaustive testimony and investigation of the incident.


"This thing is just going on and on to boredom actually," Garamendi said. "The Armed Services Committee actually did a hearing and the result was there’s nothing here. That’s obviously a great tragedy, but Ed, during the George W. Bush period, there were 13 attacks on various embassies and consulates around the world. Sixty people died. In Karachi, there was a death of one of our diplomats, and those were not investigated during that period of time because it was a tragedy."


Readers asked us whether it’s true that under Bush, "there were 13 attacks on various embassies and consulates around the world, (and) 60 people died."


We turned to the Global Terrorism Database, a project headquartered at the University of Maryland. The database documents terrorist attacks around the world going back to the 1970s, and experts told us it is the best resource available for this fact-check.


We searched the database for descriptions between January 2001 and January 2009 that included the term "U.S. embassy." We supplemented these with a few other attacks listed in a Huffington Post opinion piece that Garamendi’s staff said was their main source for the claim. The Huffington Post column Garamendi cited purposely didn't count any attacks in Baghdad. So we decided to construct our count from scratch.


While Garamendi spoke of "embassies and consulates," we found several U.S. diplomatic targets killed in the line of duty outside official compounds -- such as in convoys or their homes -- and we included them in our count. Once we cross-referenced the attacks in the article and those in the database, we narrowed down the total to 39 attacks or attempted attacks on U.S. embassies and embassy personnel.


Of these 39 attacks, 20 resulted in at least one fatality. (Our complete list is here.) This is higher than Garamendi's claim, though if you only count attacks on embassy and consular property, there were 13.


Garamendi also understated the number of deaths. In the 20 incidents with at least one fatality, the total death toll was 87 -- quite a few more than the 60 Garamendi cited. If you only count those at embassies and consulates proper, the number of deaths drops to 66.


We should note that the vast majority of these deaths were not Americans. We counted 63 deaths that were either of non-Americans or of people whose nationality is unknown. Another three were U.S. civilians. Another 21 were workers at the U.S embassy or consulate, either of American or foreign nationality.


So, using what we think is the most reasonable definition, Garamendi's numbers are a bit low.


What about the implicit comparison he made between Benghazi and these previous attacks? That’s a little shakier.


Generally, the experts we contacted agreed that Garamendi was making a reasonable point that there has been a steady, and comparatively overlooked, series of deadly attacks on U.S. embassies in recent years.


Still, these experts also said there are valid reasons to treat Benghazi differently from the earlier attacks.


"Is Benghazi different? Absolutely," said Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and an adjunct assistant professor in Georgetown University’s security studies program.


One reason, he said, is that an American ambassador died in the attack, which hadn’t happened since the 1970s. Another relevant question, Gartenstein-Ross said, "is whether what happened was put to the American people in an honest manner, not just with respect to the administration, but also with respect to the intelligence community."


Gartenstein-Ross added that he wasn’t endorsing "how the Republicans go about" investigating this question. But he did say it’s a "real, legitimate question."


"As always, what causes the problem is not so much what happens, but the response to it," said Theodore R. Bromund, a senior research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "‘If the administration had come out shortly after the attack and said, ‘Our consulate was attacked by organized Islamist forces, and we will pursue these terrorists and bring them to justice, one way or the other,’ I very much doubt there would be much juice in these hearings, if indeed they were being held at all."


Lance Janda, a military historian at Cameron University, agreed that Benghazi brings up important issues.


"We probably should have had more United States forces on site or at least nearby," he said. And the administration had a "muddled response in terms of releasing information," he added.


Our ruling


Garamendi said that "during the George W. Bush period, there were 13 attacks on various embassies and consulates around the world. Sixty people died." There are actually different ways to count the number of attacks, especially when considering attacks on ambassadors and embassy personnel who were traveling to or from embassy property. Overall, we found Garamendi slightly understated the number of deadly attacks and total fatalities, even using a strict definition. Garamendi’s claim is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, so we rate it Mostly True.
 

"My Other Vehicle Is a Locomotive"
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
1,797
Tokens
Sorry, The Presidential Salute Isn’t A Real Thing
NEWS
September 24, 2014
Brian Adam Jones



For the first 192 years of our republic, commanders in chief did not salute military personnel.
Barack Obama, the 44th president of the United States, flew to New York City today to speak to the United Nations about a range of issues from climate change to the war he just started against ISIS militants in Syria. But many of the headlines were focused on something far more trivial. Obama debarked Marine One with a cup of coffee in his hand, and when he went to salute the Marine standing by the helicopter, he kept the cup of coffee in his hand.


A video from the White House Instagram feed captured the moment:






The internet lost its mind, especially the Marine Corps community, responding to perceived disrespect from the president. ABC News wrote a report calling it the “latte salute.”




Writing for former tea-party congressman Allen West’s website, Michele Hickford, the site’s editor-in-chief [ed. note: shouldn’t that be Allen West?] writes:


If there was ever any doubt how this Commander in Chief really feels in his heart about our men and women in uniform, this should seal the deal. We have warriors engaged in harm’s way, and he does THIS? The latte salute. And he has the nerve to publish it on his Instagram account. Disgraceful.


But here’s the issue: There’s no regulation that stipulates presidents must salute the troops. In fact, for the first 192 years of our republic, it didn’t happen. None of the first 38 commanders in chief did it. And some of those dudes had some serious military experience. Eisenhower? Grant? I mean, Teddy Roosevelt was a war hero. Surely he felt compelled to click his heels together and cut a perfect knife-handed salute when he passed a uniform service member, right? Wrong. It was literally something that Ronald Reagan made up one day.


In Rachel Maddow’s 2011 book “Drift,” which offers a fascinating look at how modern presidents commit the military to war, Maddow describes how upon entering the White House in 1981, Reagan began saluting every uniformed service member he saw. One of his military aides, a Marine officer named John Kline, who is now a Republican congressman from Minnesota, worried that Reagan’s new ritual was inappropriate. He voiced his concerns directly with the president. Maddow writes:


Soldiers were supposed to salute their president; the president was not supposed to salute the soldiers. No modern president, not even old General Eisenhower, had saluted military personnel. It might even be, well, sort of, improper. Reagan seemed disappointed at this news. Kline suggested he talk to the commandant of the United States Marine Corps and get his advice, and the commandant’s advice ran something like this: You’re the goddamn president. You can salute whoever you goddamn well please. So Ronald Reagan continued saluting his soldiers, and he encouraged his own vice president and successor, George H.W. Bush, to do the same. And every president since has followed.


And that’s it. Now all the presidents do it because of the theater of the office. And because the media and pundits would take offense if they didn’t. Presidents salute the troops to avoid the very mess Obama just stepped in.


So now thousands of people got their jimmies rustled because the busiest and most important man in the world forgot to switch his pumpkin-spice latte from his right hand in following an imaginary protocol on his way to address the United Nations about a war he just entered. I can’t imagine what possibly could have been on his mind.


This isn’t the first time Obama has botched the salute. Last year, the president boarded Marine One without saluting the Marine by the door. Realizing his mistake, he quickly debarked and shook the young corporal’s hand, telling him, I assume, how profoundly sorry he was for offending him. For the past six years, the Obama administration has been plagued by accusations of being everything from treasonous to unpatriotic and distant from the military community. It’s a largely partisan critique of a liberal president, and Obama’s critics have often bent history to pretend his predecessors behaved differently and that the president has failed to meet some sort of standard.




AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File
What is more disrespectful, saluting with a latte or a Scottish Terrier? Discuss.
In the summer of 2001, George W. Bush saluted the Marine One crew chief with his Scottish Terrier Barney under his arm. It looked absolutely ridiculous. No one, however, questioned Bush’s patriotism. No one said that his dog salute meant that he lacked respect for the Marines or hated the troops in his heart.
But recent presidential history hasn’t been kind (or fair) to the president.


When Maj. Gen. Harold Greene was killed in Afghanistan earlier this summer, critics blasted the president for not attending his funeral. Retired Air Force Col. Morris Davis claimed that Obama “bucked tradition” since Richard Nixon attended the funeral of Maj. Gen. John Dillard when he was killed in Vietnam in 1970 and George W. Bush attended Lt. Gen. Timothy Maude’s funeral when he was killed on Sept. 11, 2001. But for one problem — Nixon didn’t attend Dillard’s funeral, nor did Bush attend Maude’s. Davis later said that he was kidding and baiting Obama critics.


Similarly, a story that has plagued the Obama administration is that he failed to visit the D-Day memorial in Normandy on June 6 every year. The story claimed that there were only four occasions in 69 years that a president failed to visit the D-Day memorial on D-Day, and all four were in the Obama administration. In reality, however, no U.S. president visited the memorial at all until Reagan did it in 1984 (he was a real trend-setter). And it had only been visited by an American president six times in total, including a visit from Obama in 2009.


If someone deserves blame for this, it’s the operative behind the White House Instagram account who posted the video in the first place. Why post a video of a sloppy salute? Isn’t that just begging for the criticism? It was sloppy, ignorant to the sensitivities of the criticisms this president faces, and absent of the high standard created by social media in the 21st century.


But it wasn’t disrespectful.


Brian Adam Jones is the editor-in-chief of Task & Purpose. He is a veteran of the United States Marine Corps and of the conflict in Afghanistan. Follow Brian Adam Jones on Twitter @bjones.
 

New member
Joined
Nov 10, 2010
Messages
78,682
Tokens
commie2.jpg
 

New member
Joined
Nov 10, 2010
Messages
78,682
Tokens
[h=1]Fury as Obama blames intelligence agencies for Isil surprise[/h][h=2]With his foreign policy approval ratings at a historic low, Barack Obama meets furious reaction after blaming US intelligence agencies for failing to predict rise of Isil in Syria[/h]
obama_3051541b.jpg
Mr Obama singled out James Clapper, his director of national intelligence, for blame





 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,998
Tokens
The fact is, the intelligence agencies have been apprising Obama all along (according to leaked reports), so he's lying (of course). But the fact that he's been skipping his
intelligence briefings most of his Presidency is quite telling.

Fury as Obama blames intelligence agencies for Isil surprise

With his foreign policy approval ratings at a historic low, Barack Obama meets furious reaction after blaming US intelligence agencies for failing to predict rise of Isil in Syria

obama_3051541b.jpg
Mr Obama singled out James Clapper, his director of national intelligence, for blame





 

Rx Normal
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
52,335
Tokens
2a72295f1a434d00b6bd780c379ec6bd-e1376879325133.jpg
The Missing Links

Obama Has Spent More Time Playing Golf Than In Intel Briefings... Nearly 800 HOURS Golfing!!!


President Barack Obama has spent more time golfing than he has spent listening to daily intelligence briefings.

The Daily Caller has calculated that he’s spent almost 700 hours in 875 “Presidential Daily Briefings” since 2009.

But he’s also spent roughly 800 hours on almost 200 golf trips since his first inauguration.

Obama’s golf trips typically last four and half hours, including one hour on the road. The longest trip took about six hours, according to regular reports from the media pool that follows the president on trips outside the White House.

In contrast, President George W. Bush largely gave up golfing during the Iraq campaign, from 2003 to 2008.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/09/30/obama-has-spent-more-time-playing-golf-than-in-intel-briefings/
 

"My Other Vehicle Is a Locomotive"
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
1,797
Tokens
Monday, 09 June 2014 17:49[h=2]UN Could Prosecute Bush for War Crimes, Says Ex-U.S. Terror Czar[/h]Written by Alex Newman

















Former U.S. terror czar Richard Clarke (shown), who resigned in 2003, dropped two bombshell statements about the Bush administration he served during a recent TV interview. First, he said, former President George W. Bush and then-Vice President Dick Cheney probably perpetrated what amounts to “war crimes” surrounding the unconstitutional attack on Iraq. While plenty of Americans on all sides of the political spectrum might be inclined to agree, Clarke went even further. He suggested the duo could be prosecuted by the dictator-dominated United Nations at the global body’s self-styled “International Criminal Court” (ICC) in The Hague.
Clarke was fairly blunt when asked whether he thought war-crimes charges should be brought against Bush, Cheney, and then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. “I think things that they authorized probably fall within the area of war crimes,” the former U.S. terrorism czar for Bill Clinton and George W. Bush said in an interview with Amy Goodman of the “progressive” Democracy Now TV program. “Whether that would be productive or not, I think, is a discussion we could all have.” It was not immediately clear why, if he believes they authorized war crimes, there should be a “discussion” about whether justice is “productive.”
Next, Clarke, listed as a “senior advisor” to the globalist Council on Foreign Relations and whose formal title in the U.S. administration was “national coordinator for security and counterterrorism,” suggested that the UN’s kangaroo “court” might play a role in such prosecutions. “We have established procedures now with the International Criminal Court in The Hague, where people who take actions as serving presidents or prime ministers of countries have been indicted and have been tried,” Clarke said without hinting at the ICC’s illegitimate nature or the fact that the United States has never agreed to participate in the widely criticized global “judicial” regime.

 

"My Other Vehicle Is a Locomotive"
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
1,797
Tokens
[h=1]Obama Has Logged Only 1/3 as Many Vacation Days as George W. Bush[/h]by Evan McMurry | 10:48 am, August 13th, 2014OR HARDLY WORKING980










“Obama golfs while the world burns” (or “bodies fall from the sky“) is the new talking point on the right, with variations for President Barack Obama’s vacation to Martha’s Vineyard this weekend. But how much is Obama actually off the clock?
This calls for some data journalism. Yahoo News’ Olivier Knox obtained the hard data from CBS News’Mark Knoller, who has made a project of tracking executive days off since 1996. Knoller compared Obama to predecessor George W Bush‘s vacations. Here it is in graphic form:
00d15e80-2265-11e4-9c92-b7c677a75bdc_presidents_vacation_obama_bush-650x243.jpg



Obama’s vacation days clock in at just over one-third of Bush’s, as do the total number of trips. Knoller didn’t count trips to Camp David as vacations, but Bush led those 3:1 as well.
The golf numbers are flipped, with Obama having played 186 games of golf to Bush’s 24, though Bush explicitly stopped playing golf early in his term.
Bush isn’t the only Obama vacation foil that has fallen apart. A few weeks ago conservatives criticized Obama for not canceling his travel plans following the downing of flight MH17, arguing that Reagan had immediately decamped from his California ranch to address to the 1983 attack on Korean Air Flight 007 — a claim that turned out to be wildly untrue.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,391
Tokens
So dimocraps blame Bush for Iraq while disregarding the intel he got, but the Stuttering Clusterfuck blames intel while pretty much ignoring the ISIS threat for a year.

At least dims don't have a double standard...
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2012
Messages
6,748
Tokens
2a72295f1a434d00b6bd780c379ec6bd-e1376879325133.jpg
The Missing Links

Obama Has Spent More Time Playing Golf Than In Intel Briefings... Nearly 800 HOURS Golfing!!!


President Barack Obama has spent more time golfing than he has spent listening to daily intelligence briefings.

The Daily Caller has calculated that he’s spent almost 700 hours in 875 “Presidential Daily Briefings” since 2009.

But he’s also spent roughly 800 hours on almost 200 golf trips since his first inauguration.

Obama’s golf trips typically last four and half hours, including one hour on the road. The longest trip took about six hours, according to regular reports from the media pool that follows the president on trips outside the White House.

In contrast, President George W. Bush largely gave up golfing during the Iraq campaign, from 2003 to 2008.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/09/30/obama-has-spent-more-time-playing-golf-than-in-intel-briefings/

Obama Has Logged Only 1/3 as Many Vacation Days as George W. Bush

by Evan McMurry | 10:48 am, August 13th, 2014OR HARDLY WORKING980










“Obama golfs while the world burns” (or “bodies fall from the sky“) is the new talking point on the right, with variations for President Barack Obama’s vacation to Martha’s Vineyard this weekend. But how much is Obama actually off the clock?
This calls for some data journalism. Yahoo News’ Olivier Knox obtained the hard data from CBS News’Mark Knoller, who has made a project of tracking executive days off since 1996. Knoller compared Obama to predecessor George W Bush‘s vacations. Here it is in graphic form:
00d15e80-2265-11e4-9c92-b7c677a75bdc_presidents_vacation_obama_bush-650x243.jpg



Obama’s vacation days clock in at just over one-third of Bush’s, as do the total number of trips. Knoller didn’t count trips to Camp David as vacations, but Bush led those 3:1 as well.
The golf numbers are flipped, with Obama having played 186 games of golf to Bush’s 24, though Bush explicitly stopped playing golf early in his term.
Bush isn’t the only Obama vacation foil that has fallen apart. A few weeks ago conservatives criticized Obama for not canceling his travel plans following the downing of flight MH17, arguing that Reagan had immediately decamped from his California ranch to address to the 1983 attack on Korean Air Flight 007 — a claim that turned out to be wildly untrue.

This has to be the dumbest Republican/Democrat pissing contest I have ever seen. These "vacation days" are simply days away from the White House. It's not as if Bush didn't work at his ranch and Obama doesn't work in Martha's Vineyard. Could you guys find something worth while to argue about?
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2012
Messages
6,748
Tokens
Monday, 09 June 2014 17:49UN Could Prosecute Bush for War Crimes, Says Ex-U.S. Terror Czar

Written by Alex Newman


















Former U.S. terror czar Richard Clarke (shown), who resigned in 2003, dropped two bombshell statements about the Bush administration he served during a recent TV interview. First, he said, former President George W. Bush and then-Vice President Dick Cheney probably perpetrated what amounts to “war crimes” surrounding the unconstitutional attack on Iraq. While plenty of Americans on all sides of the political spectrum might be inclined to agree, Clarke went even further. He suggested the duo could be prosecuted by the dictator-dominated United Nations at the global body’s self-styled “International Criminal Court” (ICC) in The Hague.
Clarke was fairly blunt when asked whether he thought war-crimes charges should be brought against Bush, Cheney, and then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. “I think things that they authorized probably fall within the area of war crimes,” the former U.S. terrorism czar for Bill Clinton and George W. Bush said in an interview with Amy Goodman of the “progressive” Democracy Now TV program. “Whether that would be productive or not, I think, is a discussion we could all have.” It was not immediately clear why, if he believes they authorized war crimes, there should be a “discussion” about whether justice is “productive.”
Next, Clarke, listed as a “senior advisor” to the globalist Council on Foreign Relations and whose formal title in the U.S. administration was “national coordinator for security and counterterrorism,” suggested that the UN’s kangaroo “court” might play a role in such prosecutions. “We have established procedures now with the International Criminal Court in The Hague, where people who take actions as serving presidents or prime ministers of countries have been indicted and have been tried,” Clarke said without hinting at the ICC’s illegitimate nature or the fact that the United States has never agreed to participate in the widely criticized global “judicial” regime.


Care to wager on whether this ever happens? You can name the price. Obviously, we would need a time limit so I can collect from you at some point. Maybe 10 years? My preference would be a wager in which a win for me means you can longer post worthless articles. Let me know if you're up for it.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,998
Tokens

Thank God Bush was smart enough to fall for the global warming scam.

Only a complete idiot would post this. An idiot that can't even spell "hypocrisy" in his thread title - even when he's copying it from another thread title.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,800
Messages
13,573,273
Members
100,871
Latest member
Legend813
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com