Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29
Thanks Tree18Thanks

Thread: where is the evidence?

  1. #1
    Join, or Die nonsqtr's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    32,903
    Thanks
    4667

    From
    Vertiform City

    where is the evidence?

    So where's the evidence?

    It's after midnight DC time, and Clapper promised he'd release the evidence "on Thursday".

    So where is it?

    Unless... unless... they don't have any?

    It looks like "officials" are now being forced to admit they don't actually have any!!!

    Obama makes case for Syria strike, British house votes no | Reuters

    The credibility of this entire administration is on the line, right here, right now.

    This is the same bullshit they tried to pull on us over Benghazi. "We believe it was because of a video", they told us. "We believe it was a spontaneous demonstration", they told us. Trouble is, it turns out they never believed any of it, and neither did anyone else.

    And now they just tried to pull another snow job on us, and this time they got busted.

    So now we're going to see, whether we really do have a rogue government, or not.

    Because if Obama goes into Syria without showing us the evidence, I will support his impeachment. That would be a violation of the War Powers Resolution and a violation of international law, and claiming a justification for war when there is none is fraud.

    Let's see the evidence, Mr. Obama. Shit or get off the pot. And if you refuse to get off, there's a whole long line of angry people waiting to use the same facilities.

    What are you, Obama? A man, or a mouse? What are you, some kind of lame-ass community organizer from Chicago, or the President of the United States? You think this cheap-ass Alinsky bullshit is going to get you by with the likes of Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping?

    And how about the American People, Mr. Obama?

    Just in case you're not fully educated on American History, Mr. Obama, let me clue you in - the wrath of the American People can be considerably more painful than anything you might feel from overseas.

    Just sayin'.

    Your job, Mr. Obama, is to get Hillary Clinton elected, and that is not going to happen, if you keep going the way you're going.

    Just sayin'.


  2. #2
    Join, or Die nonsqtr's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    32,903
    Thanks
    4667

    From
    Vertiform City
    Bingo.

    Clapper just admitted he has no evidence.

    A report issued by the Office of the Director for National Intelligence which outlined evidence against Syria came with a few disclaimers including an acknowledgment that America’s intelligence community does not have the certainty it did six months ago as to where the Syrian government chemical weapons are stored. It also does not have any proof that Assad was the one who ordered the use of the weapons.
    AP: Unclear who used chemical weapons in Syria - Finance Post

    “We have concluded that the Syrian government in fact carried these out,” Obama said in an interview with “NewsHour” on PBS.
    Right, Mr. Obama. Right. Just like you concluded that Benghazi was about a video, right?

    So, we're right back to the same two possibilities we had then: either a ) you're lying through your teeth, or b ) you're completely incompetent.

    Or both.

    And I'm starting to think "both" applies. Oh yes, it very much does apply.

  3. #3
    Veteran Member EnigmaO01's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    17,083
    Thanks
    9067

    From
    Indiana

  4. #4
    Join, or Die nonsqtr's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    32,903
    Thanks
    4667

    From
    Vertiform City
    ROFL!

    All this tells me is Assad didn't order the strike.

    Canada isn't buying it either.

    Yahoo! News Canada - Latest News & Headlines

  5. #5
    Galactic Ruler Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    60,666
    Thanks
    11092

    From
    By the wall
    Obama is desperately searching for something to take people's minds of the healthcare debacle, all the scandals rocking the administration, and his general lack of popularity before the mid-term elections come up and the democrats lose even more seats, possibly even control of the Senate as Nate Silver says may happen.

    Unfortunately for Obama and co. they are having a hard time making stuff up.

  6. #6
    Join, or Die nonsqtr's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    32,903
    Thanks
    4667

    From
    Vertiform City
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    Unfortunately for Obama and co. they are having a hard time making stuff up.
    True dat!

    How strong is America's evidence against Syria, really?

    Here's a few tidbits we're learning from this article:

    On Wednesday, Obama told PBS that the U.S. had "concluded" that the Syrian government was behind the attacks.

    Days prior, Secretary of State John Kerry said the existing evidence and reported deaths "strongly indicate" Syria used chemical weapons. And back in June, the U.S. said it had "high confidence" Assad was behind another reported chemical weapons attack.

    Yet the Associated Press' Kimberly Dozier and Matt Apuzzo, citing several anonymous government officials, wrote Thursday that a report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence on the attacks was "thick with caveats." While it was all but certain chemical weapons had been used, gaps in U.S. intelligence made it hard to directly tie Assad to their use.
    1. This administration has a penchant for opening its mouth before it's beneficial and appropriate to do so. Clearly, they'd like to be the big shots, and portray themselves to the world as the saviors of democracy. But the reality is, they're a bunch of bungling circus clowns. "High confidence"? Really? ???

    U.S. satellites have captured images of Syrian troops moving trucks into weapons storage areas and removing materials, but U.S. analysts have not been able to track what was moved or, in some cases, where it was relocated. They are also not certain that when they saw what looked like Assad's forces moving chemical supplies, those forces were able to remove everything before rebels took over an area where weapons had been stored.
    2. They don't know a damn thing about what really happened.

    Israeli intelligence operatives have reportedly intercepted communications between Syrian officials discussing a chemical attack. However, that correspondence was between "low-level staff," according to the AP, leaving open the possibility that rogue elements of the military carried out the attack on their own.
    3. The big "smoking gun" piece of evidence, the intelligence intercept, turns out to be "low level staff". And then we heard about another one where they've got a high ranking general demanding answers from his people in the field. Very clearly then, anyone looking at this from the outside, the first conclusion they'd probably draw is "it was a rogue element within the Syrian Army". If the highest ranking Syrian general didn't know, and they wiretapped him berating his own people for answer, then wouldn't that indicate very clearly that the order didn't go through Central Command? So, any effort to accuse the "Assad Regime" has in fact a very low level of confidence, doesn't it?

    Still, the U.S. has argued that if any element of the Syrian military ordered the attack, the blame would fall on Assad.

    "The commander in chief of any military is ultimately responsible for decisions made under their leadership," Marie Harf, a State Department deputy spokeswoman, told the New York Times.
    4. There's Marie Harf again! The State Department spokewoman who really works for the CIA! Ha ha - WTF - did they think we wouldn't notice?

    Obama's national security team will brief key members of Congress on the evidence against Syria later Thursday. The administration is expected to make that evidence public as early as Thursday as well.
    5. Thursday came and went. No evidence. So there's supposed to be some super-secret mystery briefing in Congress? Hm.... wait a minute, let me check Google.... Okay, the briefing has in fact taken place. Here's what came out of it:

    The Obama administration briefed members of Congress late Thursday in a display of consultation intended to fulfill a murky obligation under law and address the inevitable complaints by minority legislators that no one ever talks to them.

    Officials including Secretary of State John Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, National Security Adviser Susan Rice, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff were among those on the 90-minute telephone conference call, the White House said in a statement.
    Fucking wonderful. Susan Rice and James Clapper. I'll bet both of them have a lot of respect in our Congress, right? Not!

    "The views of Congress are important to the president's decision-making process, and we will continue to engage with members as the president reaches a decision on the appropriate U.S. response to the Syrian government's violation of international norms against the use of chemical weapons," it read.
    Right. A telephone call. They briefed the House Intelligence Committee with a telephone call. No pictures? "Look, here's the weapons being loaded onto the launcher"? "Look, here's the Made In Syria stamp on the shell fragment"? Nothing?

    This is CNN talking, right?

    "Tonight the administration informed us that they have a 'broad range of options' for Syria but failed to layout a single option. They also did not provide a timeline, a strategy for Syria and the Middle East, or a plan for the funds to execute such an option," said Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Oklahoma after the call.
    Congress wants a voice on Syrian chemical weapons response - CNN.com

    Hm... well, here's an even better one. Google "intelligence congress Syria". Here's just a small sample of what you'll find:

    Obama has power, determination to make own decision on Syria, administration says - The Washington Post

    U.S. Prepares for Solo Strike on Syria After Britain Balks - WSJ.com

    Official: U.S. may take unilateral action against Syria - CNN.com

    U.S.: If we need legal justification for Syria strike, we'll produce one on our own - Middle East Israel News Broadcast | Haaretz

    Feinstein Says Congress Need Not Vote on Syria | TIME.com

    It just gets worse from there...



    My work here is done.
    Thanks from Taylor2012

  7. #7
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,578
    Thanks
    1525

    From
    Passing Through
    By law Obama has 60 days to do as he wants. He notified congress of his intentions, that is all that is required. I don't like it any more than you do but that's the way he wants it. So, that's the way he gets it.

  8. #8
    Galactic Ruler Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    60,666
    Thanks
    11092

    From
    By the wall
    Quote Originally Posted by anonymous View Post
    By law Obama has 60 days to do as he wants. He notified congress of his intentions, that is all that is required. I don't like it any more than you do but that's the way he wants it. So, that's the way he gets it.
    Actually there is a bit more that's required:

    War Powers Resolution:

    a federal law intended to check the president's power to commit the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress, "statutory authorization," or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."

  9. #9
    Veteran Member Pragmatist's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    46,945
    Thanks
    13719

    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    Actually there is a bit more that's required:

    War Powers Resolution:

    a federal law intended to check the president's power to commit the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress, "statutory authorization," or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."
    Except you are wrong. A surgical strike at something like a chemical weapons depot is not declaring war so your entire quote is meaningless.

    I think Obama would be dead wrong to order one because so many will give him shit for doing so. He also would probably get the blessing of congress if he did ask congress so why not?
    Thanks from Devil505

  10. #10
    Veteran Member MaryAnne's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    46,683
    Thanks
    33041

    From
    Englewood,Ohio
    Obama needs to call Congress in,get their vote on record!

    I do not believe anything the Press says. They said a few days ago, we would strike on Thursday! Just a bag of hot wind!

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed