Comment Re:How does this not violate the 5th and/or 14th.. (Score 1) 371
Perhaps we could settle for "incapable of subtlety"...
Perhaps we could settle for "incapable of subtlety"...
According to the Washington Post the CIA knew he was in the car. Several news outlets report this (although that could be parroting the Washington Post); however, several early reports about the attack appear to show the CIA proud that they killed Derwish as well (although that quickly changed after people got wind that he was an American.)
Apparently there was a 'secret finding' making this ok back in 2001/2002.
George Tenet is a yes man.
You can say about Bush whatever you want, but he was always honest about it
Honest about what? Why we should invade Iraq? That we aren't torturing anyone? That the CIA didn't mean to kill that American citizen?
Obama is a worse disappointment in this regard simply because everyone with half a brain should have known that as a Neo-conservative Bush would behave that way. Obama was supposed to be a return to constitutional principles. Now he might as well be making security policy with Cheney (there's a scary thought, lol...)
The first term of "Hope and Change" was not enough to prove he is nothing more than a liar?
Sorry, Republicans handed him the perfect excuse so that objective parties will really never be able to know given they basically said f*** you to anything the guy even thought about irrespective of whether or not it was good for America...
Stop cheering me up...
They did, actually.
The CIA killed a 'terrorist' despite knowing that a U.S. citizen, Kamal Derwish, was in the vehicle at the time.
Apparently before 2002 there was a 'secret finding' that you could assassinate U.S. citizens who the government believed were aiding Al Qaeda.
That f***ing a**hole Bin Laden won the minute we started destroying our own constitution.
...amendments to the Constitution?
Obama is turning out to be just as bad as the Neo-Cons when it comes to "protecting us from ourselves."
It was, but that was a looong time ago...
What is it referencing then?
'The Blackskins'?
Seems pretty racist.
Braves doesn't seem racist to me, although it may be sensitive (and the iconography associated seems pretty racist - and I'm a Braves fan!)
These types of things are very subjective though; ergo, it is likely better to err more toward the side of those who feel slighted.
...the rest of their stuff?
If so, not only a "no thanks" but I would like to add a "I hope you die a flaming fiery death and nobody is stupid enough to buy you..."
Lerner’s computer crashed in the summer of 2011, depriving investigators of many of her prior emails. Flax’s computer crashed in December 2011, Camp and Boustany said. The IRS said Friday that technicians went to great lengths trying to recover data from Lerner’s computer in 2011. In emails provided by the IRS, technicians said they sent the computer to a forensic lab run by the agency’s criminal investigations unit. But to no avail.
Well, to be fair, before everybody gets wound up and declaring 'massive' conspiracies, why don't we get them to tell us what they think the term "computer crash" means, and what exactly happened to her (for a start) computer?
How are these computers 'crashing' in such a way that a forensics team couldn't pull data off the drives?
What e-mail infrastructure does the IRS use?
Get a list of the people that the IRS head e-mail and subpoena the e-mails ON THEIR SIDE.
Let's also find out why people at the IRS seem to suffer an extraordinary number of catastrophic 'crashes' to their computer systems, especially the higher up the food chain you go. Don't they have top of the line firewalls, anti-virus, et cetera? I know that doesn't make anyone totally protected, but I am stuck managing all of the computers for my immediate and extended family and none of them have had drives with unrecoverable data (and believe me, some of them visit some sketchy sites and install whatever appears to be interesting, lol...)
Details people, details.
Hard to know what actually happened when people just use the term 'computer crash.'
I was fine with pounding on the Taliban, but I don't think the goal should have been to do any 'nation building' there. Beat the crap out of the Taliban, kill all the Al Qaeda we can find, then get immediately out - a la the 1991 gulf war.
I don't think we should been in Afghanistan for longer than it took to decapitate the current Taliban leadership. None of this 'force democracy down your throat' crap. We didn't care that they weren't democratic before 9/11.
I did not have a problem with us invading Afghanistan because the Afghani government hid and protected Al Qaeda after 9/11.
How about Act of War against a nation that posed no threat?
Don't get me started
I am against sending troops or drones or air strikes of any kind inside of countries that have not explicitly given us permission that we are not at war with. Every president has probably flirted with this, but Bush really made it policy and Obama has followed suit (the f*cking coward.)
Thus spake the master programmer: "After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless." -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"
