Hoo Boy

Posted by: NucleusG4

Hoo Boy - 10/28/13 05:49 PM

OK.. here we go.. down the rabbit hole. Again.

I have received an email from a staunch Republican that basically was the same thing I Googled in this article. Read the article... and then read the comments...
and then please tell me what you you think.

http://www.truthandaction.org/obama-fires-9-top-military-commanders-first-time-history/
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Hoo Boy - 10/28/13 06:01 PM

One of the links on that page: Legalizing Sexual Child Abuse: Pedophilia Now Classified As A Sexual Orientation. Didn't bother reading that story, and skimmed the generals one. Yes, there've been general fired. Does it mean that these dudes didn't want to target citizens, as the story asks? Sure. whistle
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Hoo Boy - 10/29/13 07:41 AM

Really? No takers? No one is able to offer a legitimate refutation to this?
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Hoo Boy - 10/29/13 08:35 AM

Refutation of what in particular, Nuc? That there have been generals and admirals fired--yes, that is certainly true. That the firing could be a putsch--sure, that's a possibility in the same mode that all those idiotic history channel shows on space aliens are possible: Could aliens have taught the Mayans how to build pyramids? Sure. It could have happened. Is it likely to have happened? No. Ditto for that web page. And that's why I posted the link to the other story that the page "covers." Could the government be about to make pederasty legal? Sure.
Posted by: MacBozo

Re: Hoo Boy - 10/29/13 08:40 AM

It states this clearly in the first sentences of the "article:"

Quote:
We do not fire our highest commanders for playing poker with fake chips or adultery.

Your character has to be impeccable.


grin
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Hoo Boy - 10/29/13 09:06 AM

Originally Posted By: MacBozo
It states this clearly in the first sentences of the "article:"

Quote:
We do not fire our highest commanders for playing poker with fake chips or adultery.

Your character has to be impeccable.


grin


Your comment goes to their side of the argument. That the reasons stated are BS.
Posted by: MacBozo

Re: Hoo Boy - 10/29/13 09:12 AM

Aren't playing poker with fake chips and adultery signs of poor character?
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Hoo Boy - 10/29/13 09:19 AM

Ah! I see that now. Good catch.
I see this on the net at all the GOP extremist sites. I just thought there might be a simple, rational way to refute this.. other than "Your tinfoil hat is on too tight".
Posted by: MacBozo

Re: Hoo Boy - 10/29/13 09:29 AM

Actually, when you have a security clearance, you cannot put yourself into any position in which you could be bribed or coerced for information.
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Hoo Boy - 10/29/13 09:41 AM

Agreed... your behavior needs to be beyond reproach.
Posted by: MrB

Re: Hoo Boy - 10/30/13 10:38 AM

Ah, true, but just because someone is paranoid still doesn't mean people are not out to get them.

Dave