Harry Dresden
Adamantium Member
You've never had any leaders. Only mis-leaders.
youve never had a brain.only a dried up piece of shit in your cranium....
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You've never had any leaders. Only mis-leaders.
This one is about leadership traits and Obama's associations. Many of which would keep him from getting a security clearance because many of them have been involved in planning the overthrow of the government.
You may wish to examine the security clearance standards more closely. This canard was debunked by the St. Petersburg Times last October 10th (see politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/800/].
QUESTION: "List foreign national relatives whom you or your spouse are bound by affection, obligation, or close and continuing contact"
RESPONSE: Obama is not bound to his father or stepfather because both are deceased, nor is he bound "by affection, obligation, or close and continuing contact" to his relatives in Africa.
QUESTION: "Have you ever been an officer or a member or made a contribution to an organization dedicated to the violent overthrow of the United States Government and which engages in illegal activities to that end, knowing that the organization engages in such activities with the specific intent to further such activities? Have you ever knowingly engaged in any acts or activities designed to overthrow the United States Government by force?"
RESPONSE: Obama could truthfully answer "no," because he was neither a member nor contributed to such organizations. Neither serving alongside William Ayers, nor granting funding to Khaladi's group meets the disqualifying criteria. Associating with members of a disqualifying group does NOT disqualify a candidate for a security clearance, nor does his association with Rev. Wright or Frank Marshall Davis. Security clearance criteria evaluate the subject's participation in subversive organizations, not guilt by associating with members. Further, activity younger than 16 is specifically excluded from consideration (see tpub.com/content/aviation/14243/css/14243_219.htm).
The SF86, Questionnaire for National Security Positions, can be downloaded at opm.gov/Forms/pdf_fill/sf86.pdf. Question 29, Association Record, asks about disqualifying associations.
Then are we in agreement?
- Obama would not need to report those "questionable" associations because he was neither a member of, nor contributed to, disqualifying organizations.
Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, Barack Obama would meet the eligibility criteria for access to TS/SCI (SI/TK/G/B et al.) information. Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, his association with radicals does not render him ineligible for access. Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, candidates are assessed by examining THEIR actions, not the actions of their associates. Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, "guilt by association" is an invalid basis for adjudicating security clearances.
Obama has a few friends that have committed violent acts against the United States. He also trained ACORN members which one of their goals is the peaceful overthrow of the government and to cause economic turmoil. These two issue alone would prevent him from getting a security clearance.
I held a TS clearance and I got flagged just because I was molested when I was 6. Any issue in one's past that could cause you to be resentful or hateful has to be investigated.
Obama's close friendship with Frank Davis is reason enough to keep him from getting a clearance of any kind. His visit to terrorist states in the Middle East would be the same. It doesn't take much. His family is another...but not exactly a good reason. Seems Bill Clinton couldn't get a clearance ether. Funny....Democrats seem to have serious issues when it comes to clearances.
"I'll give you a few of the names of his friends.
William Ayers - Domestic Terrorist
George Soros, Tony Rezko - Criminals
Rev. Jeremiah Wright - Racist
Frank Marshall Davis - Communist"
Please provide primary source evidence that Rezco and Ayers were Obama's "friends," Rev. Wright is a racist, and Soros is a criminal. Specifics please! An association does not a "friend" make!
Mainstream media ignores such claims because they are unsubstantiated accusations. For example, AIM's "Obama's Communist Mentor" is a travesty of journalism.
I posted links.
Try clicking on them and friggen read what it says.
The MSM ignores them because they're in on it. They've lost their objectivity. Early in 09' they were actually having conference calls with Obama in the morning on how they were gonna spin the news to help him.
In a few seconds you could google this and find out what they were doing.
What do you consider to be Primary Source....a source from the MSM???
Are you fucken high????
You show people the facts and because it's not from Obama's state-run media sources they refuse to pay attention to it.
This is exactly how Hugo Chavez took over Venezuela. You bore me.....fucken mindless fool.
The President and Speaker get 6 'yes''s from me, Reid gets 5 out of 6. GW Bush gets 1 yes out of six (O.K. he seems like a fun guy to get drunk with) and Cheney gets 0 out of 6.
Any other stupid questions?
i was right....the H stands for Hack....anyone who gives Pelosi and Reid that much credit.....is a leftist Hack....
You may wish to examine the security clearance standards more closely. This canard was debunked by the St. Petersburg Times last October 10th (see politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/800/].
QUESTION: "List foreign national relatives whom you or your spouse are bound by affection, obligation, or close and continuing contact"
RESPONSE: Obama is not bound to his father or stepfather because both are deceased, nor is he bound "by affection, obligation, or close and continuing contact" to his relatives in Africa.
QUESTION: "Have you ever been an officer or a member or made a contribution to an organization dedicated to the violent overthrow of the United States Government and which engages in illegal activities to that end, knowing that the organization engages in such activities with the specific intent to further such activities? Have you ever knowingly engaged in any acts or activities designed to overthrow the United States Government by force?"
RESPONSE: Obama could truthfully answer "no," because he was neither a member nor contributed to such organizations. Neither serving alongside William Ayers, nor granting funding to Khaladi's group meets the disqualifying criteria. Associating with members of a disqualifying group does NOT disqualify a candidate for a security clearance, nor does his association with Rev. Wright or Frank Marshall Davis. Security clearance criteria evaluate the subject's participation in subversive organizations, not guilt by associating with members. Further, activity younger than 16 is specifically excluded from consideration (see tpub.com/content/aviation/14243/css/14243_219.htm).
The SF86, Questionnaire for National Security Positions, can be downloaded at opm.gov/Forms/pdf_fill/sf86.pdf. Question 29, Association Record, asks about disqualifying associations.
Then are we in agreement?
- Obama would not need to report those "questionable" associations because he was neither a member of, nor contributed to, disqualifying organizations.
Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, Barack Obama would meet the eligibility criteria for access to TS/SCI (SI/TK/G/B et al.) information. Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, his association with radicals does not render him ineligible for access. Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, candidates are assessed by examining THEIR actions, not the actions of their associates. Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, "guilt by association" is an invalid basis for adjudicating security clearances.
Obama has a few friends that have committed violent acts against the United States. He also trained ACORN members which one of their goals is the peaceful overthrow of the government and to cause economic turmoil. These two issue alone would prevent him from getting a security clearance.
I held a TS clearance and I got flagged just because I was molested when I was 6. Any issue in one's past that could cause you to be resentful or hateful has to be investigated.
Obama's close friendship with Frank Davis is reason enough to keep him from getting a clearance of any kind. His visit to terrorist states in the Middle East would be the same. It doesn't take much. His family is another...but not exactly a good reason. Seems Bill Clinton couldn't get a clearance ether. Funny....Democrats seem to have serious issues when it comes to clearances.
While your anecdote is interesting, it does not refute existing personnel security standards. The United States Government does not include guilt-by-association as disqualifying. It is the actions of the subject, not the actions of his associates, that may be disqualifying. Neither Obama's friendships nor visits are disqualifying criteria according to the personnel security standards of the United States Government. Please READ the security clearance information provided by the government. Please READ the St. Petersberg Times debunking of this myth.
Frank Marshall Davis's son, who lived with Davis until he joined the military, retired as an Air Force Intelligence Officer (TS/SCI). Obviously his father's FBI file was NOT disqualifying. If this long-term association is not disqualifying, what makes you think that any short-term acquaintance or friendship is disqualifying?
Unfortunately you seem to misrepresent speculation as fact once again. I challenge you to prove that Obama's FRIENDS "committed violent acts against the United States." Proof must consist of empirical evidence (not speculation) that such people actually were "friends," and that they "committed violent acts against the United States." Ayers, for example, was a professional associate. Please prove that they actually were "friends." Please do the same for any other such "friends."
Please provide empirical evidence (not speculation) that an actual "goal" of ACORN "is the peaceful overthrow of the government and to cause economic turmoil." The goals of ACORN are clearly documented at acorn.org.
FYI: "Peaceful overthrow" may be an oxymoron, because the only way our government could be overthrown is by force. If change is peaceful, then it is a hardly qualifies as an "overthrow."
The personnel security standards consider membership in organizations devoted to VIOLENT overthrow, not "peaceful overthrow," to be disqualifying. Causing "economic turmoil" is not a disqualifying factor, nor is training ACORN members.
Further, what "visits to terrorist states" do you consider disqualifying?
BTW: I welcome the opportunity to debate these issues in a cordial manner.
"The way to combat noxious ideas is with other ideas. The way to combat falsehoods is with truth." - William O. Douglas
Really? Name one, aside from Ayers, who was already adressed in the last post.This one is about leadership traits and Obama's associations. Many of which would keep him from getting a security clearance because many of them have been involved in planning the overthrow of the government.
You may wish to examine the security clearance standards more closely. This canard was debunked by the St. Petersburg Times last October 10th (see politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/800/].
QUESTION: "List foreign national relatives whom you or your spouse are bound by affection, obligation, or close and continuing contact"
RESPONSE: Obama is not bound to his father or stepfather because both are deceased, nor is he bound "by affection, obligation, or close and continuing contact" to his relatives in Africa.
QUESTION: "Have you ever been an officer or a member or made a contribution to an organization dedicated to the violent overthrow of the United States Government and which engages in illegal activities to that end, knowing that the organization engages in such activities with the specific intent to further such activities? Have you ever knowingly engaged in any acts or activities designed to overthrow the United States Government by force?"
RESPONSE: Obama could truthfully answer "no," because he was neither a member nor contributed to such organizations. Neither serving alongside William Ayers, nor granting funding to Khaladi's group meets the disqualifying criteria. Associating with members of a disqualifying group does NOT disqualify a candidate for a security clearance, nor does his association with Rev. Wright or Frank Marshall Davis. Security clearance criteria evaluate the subject's participation in subversive organizations, not guilt by associating with members. Further, activity younger than 16 is specifically excluded from consideration (see tpub.com/content/aviation/14243/css/14243_219.htm).
The SF86, Questionnaire for National Security Positions, can be downloaded at opm.gov/Forms/pdf_fill/sf86.pdf. Question 29, Association Record, asks about disqualifying associations.
Then are we in agreement?
- Obama would not need to report those "questionable" associations because he was neither a member of, nor contributed to, disqualifying organizations.
Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, Barack Obama would meet the eligibility criteria for access to TS/SCI (SI/TK/G/B et al.) information. Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, his association with radicals does not render him ineligible for access. Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, candidates are assessed by examining THEIR actions, not the actions of their associates. Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, "guilt by association" is an invalid basis for adjudicating security clearances.
Obama has a few friends that have committed violent acts against the United States.
Only in you and Glenn Beck's eyes. Thankfully, no one cares what you two think.He also trained ACORN members which one of their goals is the peaceful overthrow of the government and to cause economic turmoil.
Provably incorrect.These two issue alone would prevent him from getting a security clearance.
No, not quite. No matter what Joseph McCarthy thinks, a friend in the Communist Party won't stop you from getting clearance. This post has nothing to do with the law - only what you seem to wish the law was.I held a TS clearance and I got flagged just because I was molested when I was 6. Any issue in one's past that could cause you to be resentful or hateful has to be investigated.
Obama's close friendship with Frank Davis is reason enough to keep him from getting a clearance of any kind.
None of these things are true.His visit to terrorist states in the Middle East would be the same. It doesn't take much. His family is another...but not exactly a good reason. Seems Bill Clinton couldn't get a clearance ether. Funny....Democrats seem to have serious issues when it comes to clearances.
Really? Name one, aside from Ayers, who was already adressed in the last post.You may wish to examine the security clearance standards more closely. This canard was debunked by the St. Petersburg Times last October 10th (see politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/800/].
QUESTION: "List foreign national relatives whom you or your spouse are bound by affection, obligation, or close and continuing contact"
RESPONSE: Obama is not bound to his father or stepfather because both are deceased, nor is he bound "by affection, obligation, or close and continuing contact" to his relatives in Africa.
QUESTION: "Have you ever been an officer or a member or made a contribution to an organization dedicated to the violent overthrow of the United States Government and which engages in illegal activities to that end, knowing that the organization engages in such activities with the specific intent to further such activities? Have you ever knowingly engaged in any acts or activities designed to overthrow the United States Government by force?"
RESPONSE: Obama could truthfully answer "no," because he was neither a member nor contributed to such organizations. Neither serving alongside William Ayers, nor granting funding to Khaladi's group meets the disqualifying criteria. Associating with members of a disqualifying group does NOT disqualify a candidate for a security clearance, nor does his association with Rev. Wright or Frank Marshall Davis. Security clearance criteria evaluate the subject's participation in subversive organizations, not guilt by associating with members. Further, activity younger than 16 is specifically excluded from consideration (see tpub.com/content/aviation/14243/css/14243_219.htm).
The SF86, Questionnaire for National Security Positions, can be downloaded at opm.gov/Forms/pdf_fill/sf86.pdf. Question 29, Association Record, asks about disqualifying associations.
Then are we in agreement?
- Obama would not need to report those "questionable" associations because he was neither a member of, nor contributed to, disqualifying organizations.
Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, Barack Obama would meet the eligibility criteria for access to TS/SCI (SI/TK/G/B et al.) information. Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, his association with radicals does not render him ineligible for access. Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, candidates are assessed by examining THEIR actions, not the actions of their associates. Despite continuing right-wing disinformation, "guilt by association" is an invalid basis for adjudicating security clearances.
Obama has a few friends that have committed violent acts against the United States.
Only in you and Glenn Beck's eyes. Thankfully, no one cares what you two think.
Provably incorrect.
No, not quite. No matter what Joseph McCarthy thinks, a friend in the Communist Party won't stop you from getting clearance. This post has nothing to do with the law - only what you seem to wish the law was.I held a TS clearance and I got flagged just because I was molested when I was 6. Any issue in one's past that could cause you to be resentful or hateful has to be investigated.
Obama's close friendship with Frank Davis is reason enough to keep him from getting a clearance of any kind.
None of these things are true.His visit to terrorist states in the Middle East would be the same. It doesn't take much. His family is another...but not exactly a good reason. Seems Bill Clinton couldn't get a clearance ether. Funny....Democrats seem to have serious issues when it comes to clearances.
Neither Barack Obama nor Bill Clinton were ever denied clearance.
Mudwhistle said:Yes...Czar is just another word for advisor...a Russian word I might add. And it actually means emperor or king.
Mudwhistle said:Yes...Czar is just another word for advisor...a Russian word I might add. And it actually means emperor or king.
Did Obama come up with this name?
Mudwhistle said:Yes...Czar is just another word for advisor...a Russian word I might add. And it actually means emperor or king.
Did Obama come up with this name?
I don't think Obama could be that original...but for some reason he likes using the word.
By the way...which one of his czars has been through a screening process before Congress?
Mudwhistle said:Yes...Czar is just another word for advisor...a Russian word I might add. And it actually means emperor or king.
Did Obama come up with this name?
I don't think Obama could be that original...but for some reason he likes using the word.
By the way...which one of his czars has been through a screening process before Congress?
Did Obama come up with this name?
I don't think Obama could be that original...but for some reason he likes using the word.
By the way...which one of his czars has been through a screening process before Congress?
Did you complain about the czars before Obama? Or did they only upset you once Obama became President?
By the way, "Czar" is the Russian transliteration of "Caeser".
They can only be in an advisory position...not run a department or act as supervisors.
Why is the guy on the left labled "LEFT", but the guy on the right is labled "FAR RIGHT"?
They can only be in an advisory position...not run a department or act as supervisors.
An example?
Why is the guy on the left labled "LEFT", but the guy on the right is labled "FAR RIGHT"?
My normal answer would be..."How the fuck do I know???"
I didn't publish it nor did I draw it.
Why is the guy on the left labled "LEFT", but the guy on the right is labled "FAR RIGHT"?
My normal answer would be..."How the fuck do I know???"
I didn't publish it nor did I draw it.
The question was rhetorical. Thanks for answering though.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOKxEuwQNCA]YouTube - Burpy Kitty[/ame]
Reid's completely incompetant.
But you've got to give credit where credit is due: Hate Pelosi all you want, but she's been quite effective as a Speaker, doing exactly what her job is - getting Dem bills passed.
If Pelosi wasn't as good at her job as she is, the health care bill, the stimulus package, and countless other bills wouldn't have been passed. And that's her job - to get those bills passed. Don't like it?
Build a better system.