Forgot your password?
Type your email address below and click the sign up button to create an account.
Right now I am trying to track down the reason General Petraeus may be rotating out of Afghanistan...
My conspiracy:...It might be a way out
Here's another conspiracy theory reported in a foreign newspaper.
What can I say?"Ask and you will receive" but I wasn't expecting conspiracy theories.
The initial invasion of Afghanistan was led by the CIA because we didn't have any real war plans ready to go. It was a remarkable mission that used the Northern Alliance, the 300 of our forces, to drive out the Taliban and 75% of Al qaida... I really don't know what you wanna do about the opium trade.
I am neither an engineer ,a truther,or a connoisseur of conspiracy theories,so I don't feel comfortable discussing such issues but you are probably tired of hearing that.
I'm just a simple man that doesn't know why more wasn't said about the unaccounted $96 million walk around money for a Iraq or the small arms cache that went missing under the watchful eye of General Petraeus. "Petraeus himself presided over an arms debacle in Iraq in 2004 and 2005 in which nearly 200,000 weapons went missing."
an audit by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction found that in the South Central Region, based in Hillah, officers “cannot properly account for or support $96.6 million in cash and receipts.”
Questions we will never get the answers and you are probably right the statue of limitations or reasonable expectations has run out.
Have a good one and we'll have to again, agreed to disagree.
Specifics.............. well I'll only name a few which I know that the statute of limitations has not run out on.
Randy Weavers family.
USS Liberty.........I believe it was 34 dead.
Building 7 at the world trade center, no planes trains or automobiles hit anywhere near building 7.
The pentagon plane. I don't care how fast a plane is going, it will not disintegrate everything except the passport of the terrorist who was supposed to be the pilot.
The Afghan war was, and is, a CIA operation. The Taliban had heroin production reduced to 10% of the worldwide supply, now it's back up over 50.
BBC reported that 4 of the 911 hijacker/pilots are alive and well enough to have given them interviews. I believe one of the four is the one who supposedly disintegrated at the pentagon without his passport.
I could do this all day, but I have a little work to do.
I will say this for you Mike, I respect your view of things and I respect the fact that you can have a civilized discussion without it becoming personal.
So, agree or not, we can always agree to disagree.
Have a good one.
There's authority and then there's the expertise; we all know the meaning of " jack of all trades master of none." I think it's a moot point because neither party is trying to consolidate those agencies but they could rearrange the chairs. It's been said that FEMA and the Labor department could be more effective outside of the Department of Homeland Security.
The commander in chief knows enough to give him plausible deniability in covert CIA operations.
I didn't say one state had to comply with the other states's environmental laws but they might be a victim to them,then we would have constant lawsuits of state v state. The EPA is much more than an oversight agency; look up the last Supreme Court case where the Supreme Court sided with the EPA. They wrote the guidelines after being convinced that CO2 is a pollutant.There are all moot points because like the president's 10 pound budget proposal and the house's budget proposals,all are merely starting points(bad ones at that) and agency eliminations will not be part of it this time.
I don't think there's anyone against a fair trial and appropriate punishment but you have to be more specific... I know no one has seen any jail time for the financial crisis of 2008 or the Iraq war fiasco.
The FBI has the authority to do EVERYTHING that NSA and DHS does.The CIA answers to no one, no accountability at all, even the so-called commander in chief does not know all that the CIA is up to. CIA and NSA are also interchangeable.
Each state has its own regulatory agency for environmental issues, I did not mention requiring one state to comply with anothers guidelines. The EPA is an "oversight" agency. They just make sure states comply with their minimum standards.
When I say "accountability" I mean criminal charges, not a forced resignation when somebody screws up.
I may be able to agree that there's redundancy in government with 18 intelligent collection forces, I don't agree that the FBI,NSA, and DHS have the same duties. The FBI can go worldwide and meet with their counterparts to investigate terrorist bombings, money laundering, another foreign and domestic problems. The State Dept negotiates treaties and does not involve itself with those of a covert CIA etc, the list goes on...... If I lived in Arkansas, I wouldn't want Texas's emission laws and vice versa.
Everyone supports less government and more accountability but that is just a sound bite.
Without specifics, your last sentence is a little vague... I don't think we can eliminate investigating domestic terrorism and if there are facts to support whenever agency you suspect, they should be reported to the authorities. The GOP has a brand new Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,Darrell Issa with full subpoena power.
Saying you are going to slash the budget is wonderful, but I think redundancy in government should be the key issue. FBI, NSA, and DHS all have the same duties. CIA and State Department, same. The EPA should be cut because each state has its own version. The TCEQ fiasco for Texas.
I support less government and more accountability to the taxpayers.
The Federal Reserve can't account for at least 9 Trillion bucks, that is over Half the national debt.
Instead of investigating citizens as terrorists, we should be investigating the criminals who are supposed to be investigating.
I left the link for those that wanted more,which is a lot more than I can say for some....I didn't want to cut & paste the whole show but some will never be satisfied...I realize that.
Cherry pick is always subjective and I knew that when I wrote this blog but overall I think I presented a fair view but that is just my opinion..Pleasing all is an impossibility.
Nice job of cherry picking.
This is what Ryan really said about the cuts he proposed:
"Ben Bernanke came to our committee a few days ago and said if you guys put in place a real plan to get the deficit under control, that will help the economy now, because that sends the signals to the markets, to the small businessmen and women of America that my taxes aren't going to have to pay for all this borrowing, that interest rates are going to be low.
So getting spending under control today gives confidence for tomorrow, and that leads to more hiring and job creation.Look, I am not worried about Washington cutting too much spending too fast. I mean, the kinds of spending cuts we're talking about just right now are $100 billion out of a $3.7 trillion budget.
Look, if borrowing and spending were the way to create jobs, we would be at full employment. We are not. We have high unemployment. And so last year, at the end of the fiscal year, this government had $1.4 trillion leftover money. We call that unobligated spending.
We don't even know how much more. They have thrown so much money at these bureaucracies that in a full fiscal year they can't even spend all of the money."
This is why Ryan said he voted against the Debt Commission:
"I did, and I proposed alternatives. The reason I voted against the Fiscal Commission, because it didn't deal with the driver, which is healthcare spending. Alice Rivlin and I, a Democrat, proposed real significant healthcare entitlement reform. It was not accepted by the Fiscal Commission, and that is in large part why I didn't support --"
John Boehner and Shillings on Meet the Press refused to be drawn into an entitlement negotiation session with David Gregory - who the H3ll does he think he is? They know that this is a trap by the media to discredit them. Everyone knows that entitlement spending cuts will have to be a bi-partisan agreement.
Entitlement spending will be brought under control one way or another. Whatever is done the safety net for the poor will be maintained as it should be.