They aren't very good at keeping secrets, are they?

They aren't very good at keeping secrets, are they? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

TheHeretic -> They aren't very good at keeping secrets, are they? (8/2/2012 8:07:20 PM)
Which comes first with this administration? National security, or fuel for the re-election campaign's theme of the day? I mean, shit, at least Plame was a specific, targeted response. This is just a press release to try and make the President look muscular and aggressive on foreign policy. After spending $100 million on attack ads that didn't move the polls, at least feeding national security info to the media doesn't cost campaign cash. quote: President Obama has secretly authorized covert U.S. aid for rebels seeking to oust Syrian President Bashar Assad, U.S. officials told CNN and NBC News. The secret order, referred to as an "intelligence finding," allows for more extensive clandestine non-lethal support, including intelligence, by the CIA and other agencies than previously acknowledged, the officials told the networks. It was unclear when Obama signed the authorization, but officials told CNN he signed it within the past several months. http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/news/newsbyid.asp?idx=290692 (You may have to skip a welcome screen at the link, or you can copy/paste " syria us arming secret " into Google and get the story all the way from HuffnPoo to Alex Jones)

MrRodgers -> RE: They aren't very good at keeping secrets, are they? (8/2/2012 8:42:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Which comes first with this administration? National security, or fuel for the re-election campaign's theme of the day? I mean, shit, at least Plame was a specific, targeted response. This is just a press release to try and make the President look muscular and aggressive on foreign policy. After spending $100 million on attack ads that didn't move the polls, at least feeding national security info to the media doesn't cost campaign cash. quote: President Obama has secretly authorized covert U.S. aid for rebels seeking to oust Syrian President Bashar Assad, U.S. officials told CNN and NBC News. The secret order, referred to as an "intelligence finding," allows for more extensive clandestine non-lethal support, including intelligence, by the CIA and other agencies than previously acknowledged, the officials told the networks. It was unclear when Obama signed the authorization, but officials told CNN he signed it within the past several months. http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/news/newsbyid.asp?idx=290692 (You may have to skip a welcome screen at the link, or you can copy/paste " syria us arming secret " into Google and get the story all the way from HuffnPoo to Alex Jones) Same question for any administration during any election year. What of it ? This is supposed to be different ? Oh, that's right, we hold this guy to a whole new yet extremely hypocritical standard and by omission, you have nothing superior to suggest. The real question is how did Obama set off the Syrian rev. just in time to pander for some election gravitas.

servantforuse -> RE: They aren't very good at keeping secrets, are they? (8/2/2012 9:04:07 PM)
Lets not forget about leaking the information about the internet bug we and others planted to disrupt Iran's nuclear program..

TheHeretic -> RE: They aren't very good at keeping secrets, are they? (8/2/2012 9:11:19 PM)
I dunno, Servant. Blowing the Yemen infiltration ranks right up there. Then again the background on Stuxnet included the easy ways to import such a program into a closed system, so you might be right. Did we really need to know the FBI's test results on how many flash drives dropped in government parking lots would get plugged in to a computer in the building?

Moonhead -> RE: They aren't very good at keeping secrets, are they? (8/3/2012 5:00:37 AM)
Nope. But it's still a bit less contemptuous of national security than naming a serving intelligence officer as a publicity stunt.

Sanity -> RE: They aren't very good at keeping secrets, are they? (8/3/2012 5:37:32 AM)
quote: Which comes first with this administration? Obama is the child king, thats whats up Just another example

TheHeretic -> RE: They aren't very good at keeping secrets, are they? (8/3/2012 6:06:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead Nope. But it's still a bit less contemptuous of national security than naming a serving intelligence officer as a publicity stunt. That was covered in the first post, Moon. BTW, I never saw you back on the other thread. Did you see the answer to your question about homophobe fundies of the Democrat persuasion?

thompsonx -> RE: They aren't very good at keeping secrets, are they? (8/3/2012 9:17:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse Lets not forget about leaking the information about the internet bug we and others planted to disrupt Iran's nuclear program.. Would you be comfortable with iran or any other country doing the same "stuxnet" type bugs on the u.s.?

Moonhead -> RE: They aren't very good at keeping secrets, are they? (8/3/2012 12:25:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead Nope. But it's still a bit less contemptuous of national security than naming a serving intelligence officer as a publicity stunt. That was covered in the first post, Moon. BTW, I never saw you back on the other thread. Did you see the answer to your question about homophobe fundies of the Democrat persuasion? Nope. I'm not even sure which thread that was, I'm afraid.

Rule -> RE: They aren't very good at keeping secrets, are they? (8/3/2012 4:53:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers The real question is how did Obama set off the Syrian rev. just in time to pander for some election gravitas. I suspect that that would have happened anyway. The real question is what else is in the works that a secret service is willing to spill the beans on a past project of minor importance.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.076172E-02