Mock

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98

In case you haven't figured it out yet, I knew Glen; my brother worked with him on other projects. What happened to that team was a crime. I knew it was a lie the second they told it. We had assets that were minutes away; why were they not deployed? This was a cover up from day one; they should all be sent to prison.

(08-27-2015, 10:45 PM)pyropappy Wrote: [ -> ]In case you haven't figured it out yet, I knew Glen; my brother worked with him on other projects.

Well then, because you say so, I believe everything/every post you make on the topic. Because you know stuff and you're unbiased and objective on the subject.

Bullshit

I'm familiar with WND and their reader base, pappy. And I've read the NY Times piece referenced in the WND article that you linked.

I've also read the reports from the GOP-led Congressional Investigation and the statements from the CIA and the Obama Administration.

I don't dispute that we the people don't always get the full or true story when it comes to sensitive intel, nor do I claim to know for certain the role or level of authorized American involvement in the arms moving from Gaddafi, to the Libyan rebels, to Turkey, to Syrian rebels and al-Qaeda.

Unlike you, however, I don't claim to personally know for a fact things that I couldn't possibly know for a fact. Nor do I imply that someone has their head up their ass blah blah blah and then pose a bunch more questions rather than answer a direct question posed to me in response to something that I posted. That's lame.

Anyway, if you have facts to back up your assertions or just want to share your opinions and parroted Clinton conspiracy theories on Benghazi, China ties, the Muslim Brotherhood, Serbia, and any other topics, I'll look forward to reading them.

In the meantime, I'm not gonna go chasing down your sources in order to answer your questions regarding your innuendo, pappy. You're not that compelling or convincing. If you want us to know what you think and why, it's up to you to post it up yourself.

(08-27-2015, 06:24 PM)Blindgreed1 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-20-2015, 12:19 AM)username Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-19-2015, 10:39 PM)BlueTiki Wrote: [ -> ]Just to be clear, your premise is that Hillary knew the difference between classified and non-classified material OR she needed to be told the difference?

As I understand it, emails were clearly labeled classified or not classified. A classified email shouldn't have been sent to her from some just .gov address. The emails she responded to or forwarded have been subsequently "classified". They weren't at the time that she received or responded to them.

ETA: I could see how emails might transition from unclassified to classified based on following events.

She said she did nothing different from her predecessors, but State says Colin Powell is the only one who used personal email for government matters.

I remember when Colin Powell was raked over the coals and accused of being dishonest and not trust worthy because he used personal emails for government matters....

Oh wait. That never happened.

Those Clintons sure do have some kinda power. Minds get lost left & right. hah

Pappy said cunt. Hahaha!

(08-27-2015, 11:38 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ]I'm familiar with WND and their reader base, pappy. And I've read the NY Times piece referenced in the WND article that you linked.

I've also read the reports from the GOP-led Congressional Investigation and the statements from the CIA and the Obama Administration.

I don't dispute that we the people don't always get the full or true story when it comes to sensitive intel, nor do I claim to know for certain the role or level of authorized American involvement in the arms moving from Gaddafi, to the Libyan rebels, to Turkey, to Syrian rebels and al-Qaeda.

Unlike you, however, I don't claim to personally know for a fact things that I couldn't possibly know for a fact. Nor do I imply that someone has their head up their ass blah blah blah and then pose a bunch more questions rather than answer a direct question posed to me in response to something that I posted. That's lame.

Anyway, if you have facts to back up your assertions or just want to share your opinions and parroted Clinton conspiracy theories on Benghazi, China ties, the Muslim Brotherhood, Serbia, and any other topics, I'll look forward to reading them.

In the meantime, I'm not gonna go chasing down your sources in order to answer your questions regarding your innuendo, pappy. You're not that compelling or convincing. If you want us to know what you think and why, it's up to you to post it up yourself.

Sorry, your straw man argument doesn’t work. Of course I know a great many things you don’t; you know a great many I don’t. You have no idea who I am, nor what experiences I have had. I have been privy to many unique educational opportunities that I choose not to discuss.

That said, I know these things:

1. Not to trust any news source; they all have an agenda. Be it ideological, greed or personal fame; they all filter their reporting through that agenda.

2. Not to trust any Politian; the system is corrupt. It will destroy anyone that does not conform; history is rife with examples.

3. Not to trust “government”. Bureaucracies are run by people, and people are flawed. Be it DOD, State, EPA or some local commission their decisions are based on their personal prejudices.

4. People that don’t learn history are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.

I do my own homework; things I care about I research till I satisfy myself I understand what can be understood.

So what have I truly asserted? Hillary Clinton is a liar; that is fact not opinion. She lied about that video; that was easily demonstrated. I then ask: if she lied about that what else has she lied about? The media is not doing their job. They were given first amendment protections for a litany of reasons; one of the most important was to protect the general public from politicians that lie. I put forth a series of questions the media should be investigating; questions everyone should want answered to make an informed educated decision.

Your assertion I suffer from delusions of grandeur or worse, I am just a right wing conspiracy nut is ludicrous. I am warning all not to make a decision without truly educating themselves. I have stated on many occasions you are not being told the truth; it is your responsibility to seek the truth if the corrupt media refuses to do its job. I couldn't care less what that decision is; I do care that voters fulfill their responsibility because I have to live with their poor choices.

Washington is full lying, self-serving, greedy pieces of shit politicians on both sides of the aisle that appoint even bigger jackasses to head government agencies that perpetuate this inept corrupt system. If people continue to ignore their responsibility this country is doomed. Maybe you think there is another reason Congress has an approval of less than one in five?

Your continued support for the Hellbitch without knowing the answers to the questions I posed speaks more about your character than hers. I have found those answers to my satisfaction, and have no qualms expressing my opinion she is most certainly not the answer to the problems that face this country.

(08-27-2015, 10:57 PM)username Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-27-2015, 10:45 PM)pyropappy Wrote: [ -> ]In case you haven't figured it out yet, I knew Glen; my brother worked with him on other projects.

Well then, because you say so, I believe everything/every post you make on the topic. Because you know stuff and you're unbiased and objective on the subject.

User, please try think before you post your drivel. I understand the pressure exerted on your brain from having your head shoved so far up your ass you can see your molars makes that difficult, but try anyway.

Good post, Pappy. I like how well thought out it is but I don't agree with it all, just the parts regarding trust of those inside the Beltway and that we all should do our homework in order to be better informed. Smiley_emoticons_smile

(08-28-2015, 10:52 AM)pyropappy Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-27-2015, 11:38 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ]I'm familiar with WND and their reader base, pappy. And I've read the NY Times piece referenced in the WND article that you linked.

I've also read the reports from the GOP-led Congressional Investigation and the statements from the CIA and the Obama Administration.

I don't dispute that we the people don't always get the full or true story when it comes to sensitive intel, nor do I claim to know for certain the role or level of authorized American involvement in the arms moving from Gaddafi, to the Libyan rebels, to Turkey, to Syrian rebels and al-Qaeda.

Unlike you, however, I don't claim to personally know for a fact things that I couldn't possibly know for a fact. Nor do I imply that someone has their head up their ass blah blah blah and then pose a bunch more questions rather than answer a direct question posed to me in response to something that I posted. That's lame.

Anyway, if you have facts to back up your assertions or just want to share your opinions and parroted Clinton conspiracy theories on Benghazi, China ties, the Muslim Brotherhood, Serbia, and any other topics, I'll look forward to reading them.

In the meantime, I'm not gonna go chasing down your sources in order to answer your questions regarding your innuendo, pappy. You're not that compelling or convincing. If you want us to know what you think and why, it's up to you to post it up yourself.

Sorry, your straw man argument doesn’t work. Of course I know a great many things you don’t; you know a great many I don’t. You have no idea who I am, nor what experiences I have had. I have been privy to many unique educational opportunities that I choose not to discuss.

That said, I know these things:

1. Not to trust any news source; they all have an agenda. Be it ideological, greed or personal fame; they all filter their reporting through that agenda.

2. Not to trust any Politian; the system is corrupt. It will destroy anyone that does not conform; history is rife with examples.

3. Not to trust “government”. Bureaucracies are run by people, and people are flawed. Be it DOD, State, EPA or some local commission their decisions are based on their personal prejudices.

4. People that don’t learn history are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.

I do my own homework; things I care about I research till I satisfy myself I understand what can be understood.

So what have I truly asserted? Hillary Clinton is a liar; that is fact not opinion. She lied about that video; that was easily demonstrated. I then ask: if she lied about that what else has she lied about? The media is not doing their job. They were given first amendment protections for a litany of reasons; one of the most important was to protect the general public from politicians that lie. I put forth a series of questions the media should be investigating; questions everyone should want answered to make an informed educated decision.

Your assertion I suffer from delusions of grandeur or worse, I am just a right wing conspiracy nut is ludicrous. I am warning all not to make a decision without truly educating themselves. I have stated on many occasions you are not being told the truth; it is your responsibility to seek the truth if the corrupt media refuses to do its job. I couldn't care less what that decision is; I do care that voters fulfill their responsibility because I have to live with their poor choices.

Washington is full lying, self-serving, greedy pieces of shit politicians on both sides of the aisle that appoint even bigger jackasses to head government agencies that perpetuate this inept corrupt system. If people continue to ignore their responsibility this country is doomed. Maybe you think there is another reason Congress has an approval of less than one in five?

Your continued support for the Hellbitch without knowing the answers to the questions I posed speaks more about your character than hers. I have found those answers to my satisfaction, and have no qualms expressing my opinion she is most certainly not the answer to the problems that face this country.

(08-27-2015, 06:54 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ]It seems that Hillary is in agreement with the last line of that editorial from yesterday's Chicago Tribune.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opini...story.html

Yesterday she told an audience in Iowa that her exclusive use of a private email account during her tenure at the State Department "clearly wasn't the best choice" and that she understood why there were so many questions swirling around that decision.

“I get it,” Clinton said at a campaign stop, as quoted by The New York Times. “So here’s what I want the American people to know: My use of personal email was allowed by the State Department. It clearly wasn’t the best choice. I should’ve used two emails: one personal, one for work.” “I take responsibility for that decision," she added. Ref: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/hill...ar-BBmauBL

I think her current strategy is much wiser than continuing to ignore or joke about the email controversy.

Yeah and then she called the repubs terrorists. hah

If she was a boxer folks would assume she's taking a dive in the 2^nd round.

(08-28-2015, 11:04 AM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ]

Good post, Pappy. I like how well thought out it is but I don't agree with it all, just the parts regarding trust of those inside the Beltway and that we all should do our homework in order to be better informed.

So you are ok with her lying?

If that is case ok, but have you truly performed your responsibility to find out what she has lied about and why?

Yeah. I'm okay with it all. Lying, stealing, cheating, etc...it's all good.

(08-28-2015, 11:10 AM)Blindgreed1 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-27-2015, 06:54 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ]It seems that Hillary is in agreement with the last line of that editorial from yesterday's Chicago Tribune.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opini...story.html

Yesterday she told an audience in Iowa that her exclusive use of a private email account during her tenure at the State Department "clearly wasn't the best choice" and that she understood why there were so many questions swirling around that decision.

“I get it,” Clinton said at a campaign stop, as quoted by The New York Times. “So here’s what I want the American people to know: My use of personal email was allowed by the State Department. It clearly wasn’t the best choice. I should’ve used two emails: one personal, one for work.” “I take responsibility for that decision," she added. Ref: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/hill...ar-BBmauBL

I think her current strategy is much wiser than continuing to ignore or joke about the email controversy.
Yeah and then she called the repubs terrorists. If she was a boxer folks would assume she's taking a dive in the 2^nd round.

She took the dive in the dressing room; never even made it to the ring.

(08-28-2015, 11:15 AM)pyropappy Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-28-2015, 11:10 AM)Blindgreed1 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-27-2015, 06:54 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ]It seems that Hillary is in agreement with the last line of that editorial from yesterday's Chicago Tribune.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opini...story.html

Yesterday she told an audience in Iowa that her exclusive use of a private email account during her tenure at the State Department "clearly wasn't the best choice" and that she understood why there were so many questions swirling around that decision.

“I get it,” Clinton said at a campaign stop, as quoted by The New York Times. “So here’s what I want the American people to know: My use of personal email was allowed by the State Department. It clearly wasn’t the best choice. I should’ve used two emails: one personal, one for work.” “I take responsibility for that decision," she added. Ref: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/hill...ar-BBmauBL

I think her current strategy is much wiser than continuing to ignore or joke about the email controversy.
Yeah and then she called the repubs terrorists. If she was a boxer folks would assume she's taking a dive in the 2^nd round.

She took the dive in the dressing room; never even made it to the ring.

But to her credit, nobody is talking about email today hah

(08-28-2015, 11:14 AM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ]

Yeah. I'm okay with it all. Lying, stealing, cheating, etc...it's all good.

I can not express my disappointment and disagreement more strongly; it not good, it is deplorable.

The Clintons and Bushes are liars I never meet or knew a politician that wasn't. They covet their work perks like Scrouge Mcduck covets gold. When they say that its all work and the hardest job in the world I have to laugh. The problem I see is they have money and its not that but the power that comes with the office. It changes them and the lies they told last month become truth in their eyes using as many adjectives as possible.
Its a game and to see an independent in the office would be a welcome change. Just not Bernie his single payer bullshit health care in Vermont was a mess. Socialism does not work in America as we shall see when the fruits of Barrys 8 years of effort play out, but then it will be to late.

Save yourselves if you have the chance and love thy neighbor as they will be the only ones that will help in the future.

I never thought Bush jr. was a bad president. He screwed up some things like a Biden would but I could trust him more than I trust Barry. Whom I have no trust in whatsoever.

(08-28-2015, 11:21 AM)pyropappy Wrote: [ -> ]I can not express my disappointment and disagreement more strongly; it not good, it is deplorable.

Pappy, I was being sarcastic, surely you realize that. I've spent my entire adult life defending my Clinton love, I'm not doing that any more. I simply don't care about your opinion of them nor of the opinions of those who share your view. I don't say that rudely, it's just the way it is now. You're entitled to your opinion and so are those who share it and I am entitled to mine.

I like to think of it like my Paris Hilton attraction. Love025

Precisely.

Obviously you don't know what a "straw man argument" is, nor do you know what it means to "parrot", pappy. Those are things that you did, not I.

I didn't attempt to refute your arguments by insulting you as a person, as a straw man would. I mocked you a bit and asked you to clarify what "bubble-bursting" point you were trying to make in positing years-old information that some of us had already read about at a variety of sources and evaluated for ourselves. I was interested in your clarification, though it never came.

The fact that you parroted and linked mainstream media pieces in your attempted bubble-bursting post is kinda funny, considering that you immediately thereafter criticized self-contained knowledge and mainstream media pieces as fodder for people who have their heads up their asses. Have you come down off your perch and pulled your head out yet, pappy?

Anyway, whether or not you still have your head up your ass, you are still a conspiracy-theorist by definition. You claim to have information that refutes what the government has asserted and refutes public documents/testimony, but you have provided no substance to support your theory - despite your assertion that you knew the murdered Seal and have some unique education that transforms your innuendo and opinions into facts.

At this point, you're just a guy who doesn't trust politicians to always tell the truth (mind-blowing perspective, indeed); a guy who thinks that one such politician is a hell-bitch and a cunt whom everyone should fear (you're far from alone); and a guy who claims that he is somehow more enlightened and informed than everyone else without providing any substantiation (truly a rarity on the internet).

So......you've made one thing clear, pappy - you're one of millions who won't be voting for Hillary Clinton and doesn't think anyone else should either. Fair enough.

pyropappy

username

HairOfTheDog

username

Duchess

pyropappy

pyropappy

Duchess

Blindgreed1

Blindgreed1

pyropappy

Duchess

pyropappy

Blindgreed1

pyropappy

Maggot

Duchess

Maggot

Duchess

HairOfTheDog