Obama Special Announcement 10:30 PM eastern (5/1/2011)

[RonG]

obama special announcement
,
obama court 512011
,
obamas announcement on 512011
,
obama announcement 512011
,
www.twitpic.com4s8r3n
,
joke all 7 elevens mini marts and motels will be closed due to a death in the family
,
http:twitpic.com4s8r3n
,
obama announcement tonight
,
president message 512011
,
obama speech may 1 2011 how many times did he say I
,
obama 512011 speech how many times used work I
,
how many times did obama say I in speech
,
read: obamas speech on 1st may 2011
,
burn bag in situation room picture
,
obama burn bag photo
,
obama announcement may 1 2011
,
how many times did obama say I 0512011
,
obamas may 1st annoucement
,
burn bag obama picture
,
Obamas public speech on may 1 2011
,
obamas may 1 announcement
,
How many times did Obama say I in his May 1 2011 speech
,
alex jones special announcement
,
how many times did obama say I in speech 5-1-2011
,
posters of obama situation room sale

Lol at what people searched to find this thread ....

 

[JDeezy]

DougHeil loves men, how many times did obama say I in speech fuck RonG,

...

 

[RonG]

I found Black Doug ....

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2W5UGGTIjcg&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2W5UGGTIjcg&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

 

[Rich]

Looking at this purely from a political viewpoint, the risks far out-weighed the rewards. If this thing had gone sideways and US troops died without getting bin Laden, the GOP would have had a field day.

During the campaign McCain chastised Obama while playing the role of elder statesman and said the US flat-out should not go into Pakistan, even if we knew for certain bin Laden was there. Well, this exact scenario actually came to pass, minus the certainty. If the mission failed, Obama would have been easily attacked for having bad judgment, being incompetent, losing the trust of the army, lacking critical analytical skills and for not having a fundamental understanding of international diplomacy. The political gang-bang would have been epic.

On the flip side, Doug, you don't seem to have spent a moment thinking about the fact that you voted for the guy who said he would not have sent troops in to get bin Laden. If McCain was telling the truth that means bin Laden would still be alive today. Any second guessing there?

I can't answer for Doug, but that's a pretty flimsy gotcha question. I mean, if the other choice is vote for Obama, wouldn't Doug then have far, far more second guesses about doing that than he does about this one thing with McCain? Sometimes, many times, it's about the lesser of two evils. We understand the candidates we vote for aren't perfect and do not agree with our every waking thought.

Personally, had I voted for McCain, what you are saying certainly wouldn't cause me to second guess anything. After all, it's exactly what he said he would do in the campaign, so when I voted for him I knew exactly what I would be getting in that specific instance.

Now, I would like to ask everyone why it is this administration has found it damn near impossible to get their story straight.

One day, the director of the CIA comes out and tells us that, in fact, the people in the situation room weren't watching the raid. He said that the cameras experienced a nearly 25 minute black-out. The Secretary of State then somewhat confirms this when she says that the pose she is making in the famous picture we now all know is actually her sneazing (as opposed to covering his face in shock and horror).

Then, the brilliant press secretary comes out and says the exact opposite. That they actually were watching the raid live and did see the whole thing.

Do these people meet with each other on a regular basis or what? All of this was days after the raid when there should have been one, fairly coherent story. Instead, we have 8 different stories from 8 different people all working under the same roof. It looked like a freaking circus.

 

[JDeezy]

Do these people meet with each other on a regular basis or what? All of this was days after the raid when there should have been one, fairly coherent story. Instead, we have 8 different stories from 8 different people all working under the same roof. It looked like a freaking circus.

Well at least they're not an omnipotent big brother.

Unless that's what they WANT us to think...

 

[DougHeil]

I can't answer for Doug, but that's a pretty flimsy gotcha question. I mean, if the other choice is vote for Obama, wouldn't Doug then have far, far more second guesses about doing that than he does about this one thing with McCain? Sometimes, many times, it's about the lesser of two evils. We understand the candidates we vote for aren't perfect and do not agree with our every waking thought.

Personally, had I voted for McCain, what you are saying certainly wouldn't cause me to second guess anything. After all, it's exactly what he said he would do in the campaign, so when I voted for him I knew exactly what I would be getting in that specific instance.

Now, I would like to ask everyone why it is this administration has found it damn near impossible to get their story straight.

One day, the director of the CIA comes out and tells us that, in fact, the people in the situation room weren't watching the raid. He said that the cameras experienced a nearly 25 minute black-out. The Secretary of State then somewhat confirms this when she says that the pose she is making in the famous picture we now all know is actually her sneazing (as opposed to covering his face in shock and horror).

Then, the brilliant press secretary comes out and says the exact opposite. That they actually were watching the raid live and did see the whole thing.

Do these people meet with each other on a regular basis or what? All of this was days after the raid when there should have been one, fairly coherent story. Instead, we have 8 different stories from 8 different people all working under the same roof. It looked like a freaking circus.

I don't think anyone in here has a good answer to those questions as there isn't a reasonable explanation other than something like checking which way the political winds were blowing each minute of the day. I believe everything this admin does is politically motivated. Things are tested, then retested, then statements are backed off on and other statements are corrected depending on things. I think that's why we saw what we saw immediately after getting bin laden. People didn't have their spin stories down correctly and in sinc. This does happen with each administration but it happens most all the time and most every day with the current one.

As far as this big risk thing and decision OBama had. He had no choices. He made the right call. There wasn't any other call to make. He did good. Good for him. Was it risky for our great men and women? Oh yes. Do these great men and women do risky things on a daily basis? OH YES. Why do people out there make this ONE raid out to be this great big o'l risky thing that Obama was "GUTSY" in doing? :chuckles:

Do you all realize how many risky missions these same groups of men and women do almost each day of the week? Do you know these great men and women are in N. Korea. Iran. Syria. Iraq. etc, etc, etc right now? Yes they are. Do they all have risky stuff they do in those countries? Yes they do. Was this raid on Bin Laden risky? Yes it was. But making it out to be the riskiest and most baddest, and the most gutsiest call any President in history has ever made is just downright silly and naive, AND it certainly shows how biased and eager the main stream media wants to prop up Obama for making a very obvious choice when no other choice could possibly be made. It could be said our men and women do much riskier stuff in other places that we or the public never hear about.... ever. Playing up this risk card in order to prop up Obama only goes so far. Many of us understand what the media is trying to do, and what many Democrats are trying to do. Make no mistake though, I understand the why and I get it. Heck, even if a Republican was in office I'd get it as he might be doing and acting the same way.

 

[Noonan]

Do these people meet with each other on a regular basis or what? All of this was days after the raid when there should have been one, fairly coherent story. Instead, we have 8 different stories from 8 different people all working under the same roof. It looked like a freaking circus.

Now this is some weak sauce. You're trying to question the competence of a group who just orchestrated the killing of bin Laden.

 

[DougHeil]

Now this is some weak sauce. You're trying to question the competence of a group who just orchestrated the killing of bin Laden.

That's different than downplaying the different stories from this group of people? BTW: Those people you mention in no way orchestrated anything. Obama signed off on the mission. The others did nothing. The Military did most all.

 

[Man Called X]

I don't think anyone in here has a good answer to those questions as there isn't a reasonable explanation other than something like checking which way the political winds were blowing each minute of the day. I believe everything this admin does is politically motivated. Things are tested, then retested, then statements are backed off on and other statements are corrected depending on things. I think that's why we saw what we saw immediately after getting bin laden. People didn't have their spin stories down correctly and in sinc. This does happen with each administration but it happens most all the time and most every day with the current one.

As far as this big risk thing and decision OBama had. He had no choices. He made the right call. There wasn't any other call to make. He did good. Good for him. Was it risky for our great men and women? Oh yes. Do these great men and women do risky things on a daily basis? OH YES. Why do people out there make this ONE raid out to be this great big o'l risky thing that Obama was "GUTSY" in doing? :chuckles:

Do you all realize how many risky missions these same groups of men and women do almost each day of the week? Do you know these great men and women are in N. Korea. Iran. Syria. Iraq. etc, etc, etc right now? Yes they are. Do they all have risky stuff they do in those countries? Yes they do. Was this raid on Bin Laden risky? Yes it was. But making it out to be the riskiest and most baddest, and the most gutsiest call any President in history has ever made is just downright silly and naive, AND it certainly shows how biased and eager the main stream media wants to prop up Obama for making a very obvious choice when no other choice could possibly be made. It could be said our men and women do much riskier stuff in other places that we or the public never hear about.... ever. Playing up this risk card in order to prop up Obama only goes so far. Many of us understand what the media is trying to do, and what many Democrats are trying to do. Make no mistake though, I understand the why and I get it. Heck, even if a Republican was in office I'd get it as he might be doing and acting the same way.

You're really starting to piss me off with your posts Doug. No risk involved? Bomb sniffing dogs = safe? Honestly? FUCK YOU. Coming from someone that actually served overseas in classified missions, FUCK YOU. I want nothing more than to hand you a gun, set you in the middle of Iraq, and tell you to go fuck yourself and see how long you last. Your trite overly passionate and illogical arguments need to fucking end.

I pride Obama on making the call. I know what kind of intelligence was being floated around on a daily basis first hand. Fuck.

I hate the fucking military and the government, but from all of your typing, it's people like you I hate more. FUCK. You almost make me wish I could go back. Just to be away from people like you.

 

[JDeezy]

You're really starting to piss me off with your posts Doug. No risk involved? Bomb sniffing dogs = safe? Honestly? FUCK YOU. Coming from someone that actually served overseas in classified missions, FUCK YOU. I want nothing more than to hand you a gun, set you in the middle of Iraq, and tell you to go fuck yourself and see how long you last. Your trite overly passionate and illogical arguments need to fucking end.

I pride Obama on making the call. I know what kind of intelligence was being floated around on a daily basis first hand. Fuck.

I hate the fucking military and the government, but from all of your typing, it's people like you I hate more. FUCK. You almost make me wish I could go back. Just to be away from people like you.

You served overseas in "classified" missions; you fucking hate the military and government.

You pride Obama on making the call; you fucking hate the military and government.

Doug says grunts face risk every day; you think he says they face no risk.

Doug says Obama's call was no more gutsy than any other call; you think he says it required no guts.

For emphasis:

Do you all realize how many risky missions these same groups of men and women do almost each day of the week? Do they all have risky stuff they do in those countries? Yes they do. Was this raid on Bin Laden risky? Yes it was.

lul

Your trite overly passionate and illogical arguments need to fucking end.

Don't troll while you're drunk.

 

[DougHeil]

You're really starting to piss me off with your posts Doug. No risk involved? Bomb sniffing dogs = safe? Honestly? FUCK YOU. Coming from someone that actually served overseas in classified missions, FUCK YOU. I want nothing more than to hand you a gun, set you in the middle of Iraq, and tell you to go fuck yourself and see how long you last. Your trite overly passionate and illogical arguments need to fucking end.

I pride Obama on making the call. I know what kind of intelligence was being floated around on a daily basis first hand. Fuck.

I hate the fucking military and the government, but from all of your typing, it's people like you I hate more. FUCK. You almost make me wish I could go back. Just to be away from people like you.

Huh? I truly have no clue about this. I'm frankly shocked. I have nothing else to say about this as I don't believe the poster read my post very well.

Anyway and BTW; That was some kind of way overblown and hyped up speech last night by Obama. I think things are now more confusing about Israel/Palestine than ever before. LOL What a dick Obama is.

 

[Scrote Squad]

 

[Kypus]

/Bumping this, in response to the Pakistanis being angry we violated their sovereignty to get OBL. Anyone really surprised by this?

AP sources: Pakistanis tip off militants again

WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. officials say Pakistan has apparently tipped off militants at two more bomb-building factories in its tribal areas, giving the terror suspects time to flee, after U.S. intelligence shared the locations with the Pakistani government.

Those officials believe Pakistan's insistence on seeking local tribal elders' permission before raiding the areas may have most directly contributed to the militants' flight. U.S. officials have pushed for Pakistan to keep the location of such targets secret prior to the operations, but the Pakistanis say their troops cannot enter the lawless regions without giving the locals notice.

All officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss matters of intelligence.

The latest incidents bring to a total of four bomb-making sites that the U.S. has shared with Pakistan only to have the terrorist suspects flee before the Pakistani military arrived much later. The report does not bode well for attempts by both sides to mend relations and rebuild trust after the U.S. raid on May 2 that killed Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, a Pakistani army town only 35 miles (56.32 kilometers) from the capital Islamabad.

The Pakistanis believe the Americans violated their sovereignty by keeping them in the dark about the raid. American officials believe bin Laden's location proves some elements of the Pakistani army or intelligence service helped hide the al-Qaida mastermind, bolstering their argument that the raid had to be done solo.

The U.S. officials explained Saturday how they first offered the location of the third, and then the fourth site, in order to give Pakistan another chance to prove it could be trusted to go after the militants.

In the tradition of 'trust but verify,' the Americans carefully monitored the area with satellite and unmanned drones, to see what would happen, after sharing the information a third and fourth time, the officials said.

In each case, they watched the militants depart within 24 hours, taking any weapons or bomb-making materials with them, just as militants had done the first two times. Only then, did they watch the Pakistani military visit each site, when the terror suspects and their wares were long gone, the officials said.

Pakistan's army on Friday disputed reports that its security forces had tipped off insurgents at bomb-making factories after getting intelligence about the sites from the United States. The army called the assertions of collusion with militants "totally false and malicious."

Army officials further claimed they had successfully raided two more sites, after finding nothing at the first two, but a Pakistani official reached Friday offered no details of what they found there.

The official admitted that in each raid, however, the Pakistani security services notified the local elders who hold sway in the tribal regions. The official said they would investigate U.S. charges that the militants had been tipped off.

Two U.S. officials said they were asking the Pakistanis to withhold such sensitive information from the elders, and even their lower ranks, to prove they could be trusted to keep a secret, and go after U.S. enemies.

At least two of the sites were run by the Haqqani network, which is part of the Taliban, closely allied with al-Qaida, and blamed for some of the deadliest attacks against U.S. troops and civilians in neighboring Afghanistan. Pakistan has long resisted attacking the Haqqani network, saying the group has never attacked the state of Pakistan.

The intelligence sharing was intended as a precursor to building a new joint intelligence team of CIA officers together with Pakistani intelligence agents. But U.S. officials say Pakistan has failed to quickly approve the visas needed, despite agreeing to form the team in May.

U.S. officials have also accused Pakistan of holding up to five Pakistani nationals accused of helping the CIA spy on the Abbottabad compound in advance of the bin Laden raid.

While not confirming the number, a Pakistani official said any citizen who worked with the U.S. to spy on the compound had betrayed his or her country by failing to tip off the government that someone the Americans wanted was hiding in the compound. Such a tip, the official said, could have saved the Pakistani government the embarrassment of being surprised by the bin Laden raid.

http://beta.news.yahoo.com/ap-sources-pakistanis-tip-off-militants-again-185727922.html

 

[Richfield Kid]

Not surprised. Fuck Pakistan. Steal all their nukes, subvert their economy, let India invade.... I really don't care about their interests any more.

Ahhh shit. That would probably backfire, if it was even possible. I got nothin...... DAMN, I hate nuclear weapons.

 

[Kypus]

Latest comprehensive article on the OBL raid:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/08/110808fa_fact_schmidle?currentPage=all

Getting Bin Laden- What happened that night in Abbottabad.
by Nicholas Schmidle August 8, 2011

What I got from this-

- Pakistan's air defenses were mostly turned east toward India, their most immediate enemy

- The 2 blackhawk choppers were specially modded to cover heat, noise, and movement

- The team that took him out had 10-12 previous missions into Pakistani airspace

- 4 Chinooks (heavier troop transport choppers) were involved, 2 stayed at Afgh/Pak border, 2 further inside Pakistan
- 1 Chinook had to go to OBL compound to rescue the downed Blackhawk crew
- The other Chinook inside Pakistan refueled the surviving Blackhawk on its way back

- A dog was on the team to sniff for false walls/hidden doors

- CIA had earlier staged an immunization drive (shots) for kids in Abbotabad to hopefully get OBL's kids' DNA. Unsuccessful, and doc later arrested by Pakistan

- 4 Command Centers were in on the raid- White House, Pentagon, CIA Headquarters Afghanistan (prob Bagram Air Force base N of Kabul), and American Embassy Islamabad (holy crap, risk of intel being intercepted by Pakistani ISI)

- Overhead drone at 15,000 ft provided live feed of operation (that's what they're watching in the White House photo)

- Blackhawk1 likely crashed because of absorbed heat from the compound wall, they had trained using chainlink fence, after crash sent distress call to the 2 Chinooks idling inside Pakistani border, 1 of which came as the rescue chopper, also was the one to take OBL away

- they found the gold threaded robes OBL used for his video addresses

- Noises neighbors would've heard if they were awake- Chopper crashing on wall, 4 seperate C4 explosions, sporadic gunfire. Later blew up downed Blackhawk critical systems with C4, thermo grenades

- had an interpreter dressed as plainclothes Pakistani policeman to ward off curious neighbors, backed up by 4 SEALs around perimeter, plus the dog

- DNA- Took 2 bone marrow samples from OBL, 1 on each chopper, numerous swabs (cheek I guess) taken

- OBL was flown to Bagram AFB before the sea burial

- 1 cell phone found at compound contained #s of a mujadeen group closely associated with ISI (Pakistani intel). This is the only concrete evidence so far of Pakistan actively protecting OBL. See Post 583 above though, where we've purposely fed Pakistani intelligence information about targets, only to see the baddies pack up and leave hours before Pakistan police or military get there.