Donald Trump showed bad judgement when he jumped the gun on the downed plane

[ABikerSailor]

" They're hacking into the plane's computer and taking it down remotely, somehow."

Actually, that's something that I hadn't thought of.
Is it a possibility?

That belongs over on the loonie Conspiracy Theory forum.

Actually, it makes a bit more sense than you might think. Aircraft are connected via radar and radio to the towers that they are flying with, and today's aircraft are equipped with the ability for internet connections and people use them.

Now, we already know that it is possible to hack cars, because it's been done a time or two already, so with all the electronics onboard an airplane, why not entertain the possibility that since they aren't on a closed system (unattached to the internet), someone somewhere might have figured out how to do it?

 

[idb]

" They're hacking into the plane's computer and taking it down remotely, somehow."

Actually, that's something that I hadn't thought of.
Is it a possibility?

That belongs over on the loonie Conspiracy Theory forum.

It can be done with cars...why not airliners?

 

[Care4all]

I have much better examples of bad judgment:

* Hillary's decision to cut back on security spending in Libya even as the situation was getting worse.

* Hillary's failure to intervene to get at least some of Ambassador Stevens' rejected security requests fulfilled.

* Hillary's decision to put untold lives at risk by housing highly classified information on a private, unsecured server. Normal people would have paid a severe price for such reckless conduct.

But you just don't care, do you?

* Hillary's decision to cut back on security spending in Libya even as the situation was getting worse.

Well, when congress decides to cut your budget and you have 45,000 employees to look after....bad things can happen....hind sight is 20/20 ya know?

* Hillary's failure to intervene to get at least some of Ambassador Stevens' rejected security requests fulfilled.

FYI-She didn't get any requests from Stevens, but her staff did...and even without all of his requests being filled, Stevens refused the extra security offered to him for his trip to Benghazi AND his advise to Hillary on whether to keep Benghazi opened was a resounding YES.

* Hillary's decision to put untold lives at risk by housing highly classified information on a private, unsecured server. Normal people would have paid a severe price for such reckless conduct.

She didn't choose to put lives at risk. Her server was not an unsecure server, it was a secure server, for unclassified work JUST LIKE the State.gov email server that she bypassed and went with her own....

the State.gov server that all her employees worked on and right wingers say she should have used, was an UNCLASSIFIED email system.... classified top secret or secret emails should not have been on that system either, since it was UNCLASSIFIED. Her aids who forwarded this classified T/S info that they had been emailing each other on for a year before they sent it to her, should NEVER had been on the State.gov email system....


Normal people, without the Clinton last name in a top position as hers, would NEVER EVER in a million years been raked over the coals and dragged through the mud, like Hillary has been on this by the Republicans.... Colin Powell and Condi Rice were not and they too used private servers that ended up containing classified documents/info.

The State Department headed by Mrs. Clinton had options with security. You can't blame the cuts in budget because all one has to do is to cut back on landscaping at the American Embassy in Paris and redirect monies to security in Libya. Or if one had a brain one could transfer security from Ottawa or London or Brussels and redeploy said security to Benghazi.

BUT the biggie here is that Clinton didn't want the optics of US security in Benghazi. Instead she hired local militias to guard the consulate. The February 17 Brigade.

I mean what could possibly go wrong?

yeah, sure TD, you know that was the State department's position....

got a link for that....?

 

[Care4all]

Yes they do....in their civil wars going on.

But what does that have to do with the pilot downing a plane to terrorise? Terrorize whom and for what motive?

PLEASE tell me you're not being serious....

Care to answer my question?

You seem to think your in "the know" on terrorists motives.
I think your line of thinking is beyond dumb, therefore your question has no merit in this discussion.

Oh come on Gramps, everyone on this thread including the member I was initially responding to... and you jumped in on, has their opinion on what happened.... seriously, no need to try to demean me for asking a simple, VALID in my mind, question for the member quoting that the Pilot was associated with the Muslim Brotherhood and brought the plane down purposely, as a terrorist....as an act of terrorism....

It wasn't a stupid question at all....

As example if the poster had heard the pilot was Sunni and most of the passengers were Shiite, then his post would have a tad more credibility and would have been more understandable with what the motive could be....

I have not expressed an opinion on what happened. I actually agreed with rderp. Most of the powers that be seem to think it is terrorism.
MuSLIMES kill indiscriminately. Your OPINION doesn't change that fact.

Yes, they have presumed it was terrorism...but the poster I was responding to with MY COMMENT that you jumped in on with your high and mighty opinion, stated that the pilot was part of the Muslim Brotherhood and indicated or implied the pilot ditched the plain in a suicide mission for terrorism reasons, when we KNOW that the listening devices that we have all over the world listening for things like nuclear tests, showed that there was some kind of explosion in the air before the plane took a nose dive....

To me, that would indicate that the pilot probably did not bring this plane down, but a bomb or some major mechanical failure did.

 

[rdean]

Wiki pedia is about as fair and balanced as these libtard trolls are.

But the facts are facts. There are pictures, video and news stories from all over the world about those riots. Over 50 people died. It is what it is.

 

[OldLady]

When John Roberts asked Jeff Sessions yesterday, if Trump's remarks ("It was terrorism, and if you think otherwise, you're kidding yourself" ) might be premature, Sessions said the actual problem is so much political correctness. Republicans are apparently now calling it "political correctness" to wait for the facts before making a declaratory statement.
What the hell, he's only going to be President. No need to make him spout facts. They're boring.

Please show us all where Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama stated any facts prior to, or even AFTER he took office.

I mean other than when he promised that the SEAS WERE GOING TO RECEDE AND THE EARTH WAS GOING TO HEAL!

Remember President Obama promised we would all save $2,500 a year on health insurance?

That he was going to close GITMO his first year in office? Then he learned he could not due to the nature of the savages incarcerated there?

If you like your doctor, you can keep them?

Obamacare won't cost you a single dime, not one dime more than you pay today?

If you like your insurance plan, you can keep your plan?

Wasn't one president you say lied enough? So you're going to support another one? How is that learning from experience? Actually, I wasn't saying Trump lied. I was pointing out that he misrepresented his opinion as fact and I was amused that Sessions called it "political correctness" to point that out.

 

[OldLady]

Well, I think the same evil geniuses that took down this Egyptian plane took down the Malaysian plane two years ago. They aren't going to admit responsibility anymore than they took responsibility for the Malaysian plane. They're hacking into the plane's computer and taking it down remotely, somehow. Just practicing.

A small inconspicuous bomb could easily have been placed on the flight deck four or five airports before the ill-fated flight.

Maybe. Not according to Charles DeGaulle Airport.

 

[OldLady]

" They're hacking into the plane's computer and taking it down remotely, somehow."

Actually, that's something that I hadn't thought of.
Is it a possibility?

That belongs over on the loonie Conspiracy Theory forum.

Sez you. Actually, I realize it's a bit out there, but at least it's not Alien intervention. And now it seems, from the morning news, that it was an explosion? I don't know that you could cause an explosion remotely. So I stand down.

 

[Care4all]

Who trotted out the video lie, stupid fuck?

The CIA did....it was one of their possibilities given to the administration.... ALL the different Benghazi Committees lead by Republicans in Congress have stated they found that it was in the CIA's assessment briefs.

FLAT OUT LIE!

PLEASE show your reliable source and link stating that the CIA said that the attack was caused by a video.

SHOW us or admit you are lying. Crooked Hillary Clinton said it was a planned terrorist attack that night in an email, through her illegal, unsecured server. Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama slept through the attack, as did Hillary Clinton. President Obama was up bright and early to jump on a flight to Las Vegas to host a fund raiser.

I'm not lying and I don't lie, you are the partisan hack liar, or you are simply ignorant on the topic because you probably only watch and read FOX News or right wing sites promoting their biased right wing propaganda...

And you have NOT done any further research on your own, nor watched the 10 hour interrogation of Hillary and the dog and pony show the Gowdy Commission put on for us....nor have you read the 7 different reports from the 7 different congressional investigations on Benghazi, or any news source outside of your right-wing BUBBLE of propaganda....SHAME ON YOU!! Not me.

The CIA assessment and talking points of the Benghazi attack given to the administration right after the attack included the possibility of this attack at Benghazi was initiated due to the video.


CBS News November 15, 2012, 11:30 AM
CIA talking points for Susan Rice called Benghazi attack "spontaneously inspired" by protests

(CBS News) WASHINGTON - CBS News has obtained the CIA talking points given to U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice on Sept. 15 regarding the fatal attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, four days earlier. CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan says the talking points, which were also given to members of the House intelligence committee, make no reference to terrorism being a likely factor in the assault, which left U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead.

Rice, who was considered a likely nominee to replace Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, has been attacked by Republican lawmakers for saying on "Face the Nation" (video) on Sept. 16 that all indications were the attack "began spontaneously" - suggesting it likely sprang from a protest against an anti-Muslim video found on the Internet. Protests of that nature had been seen in other Muslim nations in the days and weeks before the Benghazi attack.

The CIA's talking points read as follows:

• 
  
  
  • "The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the US Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the US diplomatic post in Benghazi and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.
  • This assessment may change as additional information is collected and analyzed and as currently available information continues to be evaluated.
  • The investigation is on-going, and the US Government is working with Libyan authorities to bring to justice those responsible for the deaths of US citizens."

...

Timeline: How Benghazi attack, probe unfolded

President Obama said Thursday he had not made a decision on who to nominate as Clinton's replacement, but he blasted senior Republican lawmakers' attacks on Rice as "outrageous." Sen. John McCain and others have vowed to block a Rice nomination over her handling of the Benghazi information.

U.S. officials have since said the attack on the offices in Benghazi appears to have been carried out by an Islamic extremist group based in eastern Libya, with at least low-level connections to al Qaeda's branch in northwest Africa.

CIA talking points for Susan Rice called Benghazi attack "spontaneously inspired" by protests - CBS News


Yes, later an Alqaeda type, wanna be group, took credit for the attack, but shortly after they did this, they RENEGED, and said they DID NOT do the attack....

It was FLUID and information on the attack was changing by the minute, and no one in the CIA or State dept or Admin, truly knew what was going on because the information kept changing.