Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Obama fires Petraeus
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
jonnevers
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 02 Jan 2003
Posts: 1593
Location: Gentoo64 land

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 6:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BonezTheGoon wrote:
Also, since when did opinions have to be supported by facts anyway?

Please submit your "facts" for why you like your favorite color, your favorite food, and your favorite holiday.


blue; its calming. also cars can be blue ( yeah double-orphans! ).

enchiladas; b/c they are fucking delicious.

easter, i guess; b/c is occurs in March. also egg laying Jesus is my favorite Jesus.

facts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John-Boy
Guru
Guru


Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 439
Location: Desperately seeking moksha in all the wrong places

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BonezTheGoon wrote:
your favorite food, and your favorite holiday.


Black pudding. It ain't foreign & Scarborough for the same reason.
_________________
Only in our dreams are we free. The rest of the time we need wages.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
b0nafide
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 17 Feb 2008
Posts: 153
Location: ~/

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Blue! No, red... aaaaaaa!!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BonezTheGoon
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 1375
Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 7:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

b0nafide wrote:
Blue! No, red... aaaaaaa!!!!


++ Perfect!
_________________
mcgruff wrote:
I can't promise to be civil.


pjp wrote:
The greater evil is voting for the "lesser evil."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BonezTheGoon
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 1375
Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 7:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jonnevers wrote:
BonezTheGoon wrote:
Also, since when did opinions have to be supported by facts anyway?

Please submit your "facts" for why you like your favorite color, your favorite food, and your favorite holiday.


blue; its calming. also cars can be blue ( yeah double-orphans! ).

enchiladas; b/c they are fucking delicious.

easter, i guess; b/c is occurs in March. also egg laying Jesus is my favorite Jesus.

facts.


You have not included any "facts" at all anywhere to support your opinions. The closest you get in the fact that March is the month in which Easter occurs, but you do not substantiate how or why that has any meaning to your opinion.

Your enchiladas opinion, just an opinion.

A calming effect is an opinion since it is entirely based on perception. Now, if you cited some psychological research showing that blue is in fact calming that would be different. Also, cars can be any color, so that doesn't support blue either.

While I applaud your attempt to participate with my invitation I think you might have missed the point a bit. You'll notice I'm not even trying to "prove" my opinion about those three things, and there is a reason for that.
_________________
mcgruff wrote:
I can't promise to be civil.


pjp wrote:
The greater evil is voting for the "lesser evil."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John-Boy
Guru
Guru


Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 439
Location: Desperately seeking moksha in all the wrong places

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 7:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BonezTheGoon wrote:
Your enchiladas opinion, just an opinion.


Black pudding ain't. That's real
_________________
Only in our dreams are we free. The rest of the time we need wages.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jonnevers wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
But personally, I find the timing highly suspicious. It was essentially the first thing to happen after the election. That leads me to believe that the people most sensitive to whether it happened before or after the election were driving the timeline (they being the White House).

so these super sneaky conspiring people choose the most suspicious time to have him resign?

The picked the best time for them, after the election, and before he testified about Benghazi with the whole CIA to back him up. They did when they had to. If they'd had the luxury of picking some other time, I'm sure they would have (for example, were it not for Congressional hearings about Benghazi and continued probing by some of the press, I imagine this would have happened on some Friday before a long weekend, such as just before Thanksgiving or Christmas Holiday).
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
mcgruff wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....

So, you agree that Obama is a demoniacal, blood-licking, Machiavellian turd-burglar. Good.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BonezTheGoon wrote:
So long as they are clear that they are speculating and are not misrepresenting the information, I'd call them an intellectual for sharing in a conversation responsibly. Especially when they are not trying to convince anyone of their view and instead are simply sharing.

I'd call that process brain-storming, and sharing of thoughts and ideas.

What would you call someone that is against the open sharing of thoughts and ideas in a public forum?

A typical authoritarian.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jonnevers
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 02 Jan 2003
Posts: 1593
Location: Gentoo64 land

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BonezTheGoon wrote:
jonnevers wrote:
BonezTheGoon wrote:
Also, since when did opinions have to be supported by facts anyway?

Please submit your "facts" for why you like your favorite color, your favorite food, and your favorite holiday.


blue; its calming. also cars can be blue ( yeah double-orphans! ).

enchiladas; b/c they are fucking delicious.

easter, i guess; b/c is occurs in March. also egg laying Jesus is my favorite Jesus.

facts.


You have not included any "facts" at all anywhere to support your opinions. The closest you get in the fact that March is the month in which Easter occurs, but you do not substantiate how or why that has any meaning to your opinion.

Your enchiladas opinion, just an opinion.

A calming effect is an opinion since it is entirely based on perception. Now, if you cited some psychological research showing that blue is in fact calming that would be different. Also, cars can be any color, so that doesn't support blue either.

While I applaud your attempt to participate with my invitation I think you might have missed the point a bit. You'll notice I'm not even trying to "prove" my opinion about those three things, and there is a reason for that.

my point was to not give a fuck about your point and post what i felt like. which was your point.

you can't triple-stamp a double-stamp.

BoneKracker wrote:
jonnevers wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
But personally, I find the timing highly suspicious. It was essentially the first thing to happen after the election. That leads me to believe that the people most sensitive to whether it happened before or after the election were driving the timeline (they being the White House).

so these super sneaky conspiring people choose the most suspicious time to have him resign?

The picked the best time for them, after the election, and before he testified about Benghazi with the whole CIA to back him up. They did when they had to. If they'd had the luxury of picking some other time, I'm sure they would have (for example, were it not for Congressional hearings about Benghazi and continued probing by some of the press, I imagine this would have happened on some Friday before a long weekend, such as just before Thanksgiving or Christmas Holiday).

i guess i don't see how his being fired/resigned makes him immune from testifying in front of congress. i see that the now acting director will testify in his place but i think congress should still compel him to testify, he is clearly the subject matter expert.

if they can't do that then its a legitimate, albeit buttholeish, loophole. no? which is besides the point, he should be testify on what happened. i still don't necessarily see boogieman under the congress' bed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16105
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 11:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
OK. So that's a no [...] without possession of facts
You seem opposed to any pursuit of said facts. And of course, your guy didn't do it.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 11:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jonnevers wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
jonnevers wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
But personally, I find the timing highly suspicious. It was essentially the first thing to happen after the election. That leads me to believe that the people most sensitive to whether it happened before or after the election were driving the timeline (they being the White House).

so these super sneaky conspiring people choose the most suspicious time to have him resign?

The picked the best time for them, after the election, and before he testified about Benghazi with the whole CIA to back him up. They did when they had to. If they'd had the luxury of picking some other time, I'm sure they would have (for example, were it not for Congressional hearings about Benghazi and continued probing by some of the press, I imagine this would have happened on some Friday before a long weekend, such as just before Thanksgiving or Christmas Holiday).

i guess i don't see how his being fired/resigned makes him immune from testifying in front of congress. i see that the now acting director will testify in his place but i think congress should still compel him to testify, he is clearly the subject matter expert.

if they can't do that then its a legitimate, albeit buttholeish, loophole. no? which is besides the point, he should be testify on what happened. i still don't necessarily see boogieman under the congress' bed.

At a minimum, it reduces his credibility, making him a "disgruntled former employee". It also immediately cuts him off from any evidence he might provide in support of his testimony, because he would no longer have access to the classified information. It also greatly reduces the probability of any of his former subordinates who may have also had the same information substantiating his testimony, unless they want to also end their careers (we have seen how the Obama Administration treats whistle-blowers, and we are seeing it now as well). The David Petraeus I have heard people talk about would never ask anyone to fall on their sword for his sake. It also allows Obama to appoint a new Acting Director, whom he could use to further suppress the truth, intimidate people into silence, destroy evidence, etc.

Nobody defies the Ministry of Truth.

However, there may be other reasons Petraeus would not provide testimony damaging to Obama. (Mere speculation here, of course.) Maybe there's no hard evidence and he knows that Obama holds all the cards and it's futile. Maybe he doesn't want to ruin the careers of a dozen other good people who might somehow be sucked into it. Maybe he doesn't want to come down with cancer six or eight months from now. Who knows? Obama didn't prosecute Bush either. Maybe it's bad political karma to be a witch-hunter, and he's now actually pissed off and wants to run for office in 2016, and doesn't want the baggage of having seemed to go after Obama and failed (and it's nearly impossible to bring down a sitting President).

The facts remain that the White House promulgated several bullshit stories about what happened, and the CIA's version of events did not agree, particularly once Obama tried to pass off blame on them and/or the military.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.


Last edited by Bones McCracker on Mon Nov 12, 2012 11:57 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
You seem opposed to any pursuit of said facts. And of course, your guy didn't do it.


What we have is a box. No-one can see inside it and no-one has opened it, and so no-one knows what's in it. Should we try to open it? Of course we should. However, until we do, we won't know what it contains. Maybe it's a bunny-boiling madwoman trying to hit back at her ex by making him look like a security risk. Maybe a conspiracy to cover up an embassy drone strike authorised by Obama. Maybe aliens.

We just don't know.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
Quote:
You seem opposed to any pursuit of said facts. And of course, your guy didn't do it.


What we have is a box. No-one can see inside it and no-one has opened it, and so no-one knows what's in it. Should we try to open it? Of course we should. However, until we do, we won't know what it contains. Maybe it's a bunny-boiling madwoman trying to hit back at her ex by making him look like a security risk. Maybe a conspiracy to cover up an embassy drone strike authorised by Obama. Maybe aliens.

We just don't know.

No. That's black-and-white thinking and not how the real world works. We certainly won't know with absolute certainty until "the box" (and it's not that simple) is opened. However, the missing facts are not the only facts.

We know a lot. We know what actually happened in Benghazi. We know what the White House tried to make people believe happened in Benghazi. We know the revised version of what the White House tried to make people believe happened in Benghazi. We know the revised, revised version in which the White House pretty much acknowledged what happened in Benghazi, but tried to blame the CIA and/or military, and denied ever trying to make believe anything else. We know Republicans wanted Petraeus to run for President against Obama. We know the FBI knew about Petraeus' affair in Afghanistan, back when it happened, and can conclude that the White House knew about it as well, even when Petraeus was appointed CIA Director. And, we know that Petraeus was summoned to Obama's office a couple days after the election and the next day no longer had a job.

What we don't know is comparatively small. We don't know exactly what Obama himself knew about what happened in Benghazi and when. We don't know what role he personally played in getting the State Department, White House Staff, and others to push the bullshit story for two weeks that it was nothing but a reaction to a YouTube video (and the subsequent lies). We don't know who made the decision that Petraeus should resign effectively immediately.

Now, if you want to take those two paragraphs (which are themselves a gross simplification and perhaps include more known than unknown information) and call the situation "a black box", you go ahead. Just don't be surprised if nobody takes you seriously or people just smirk, shake their head, and walk away.

When you feel a swelling in your colon and pressure on your anal sphincter, accompanied by a painful spasm, that means you seriously need to take a shit. It's not "a black box" until you see the turd in the bowl. :roll:
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

More bloviation. There are no facts which link Petraeus' resignation to the Benghazi attack.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
More bloviation. There are no facts which link Petraeus' resignation to the Benghazi attack.

Yes, there are. They are circumstantial, but still facts:

a) The CIA gave a different story from the Ministry of Truth, which indicated the White House knew the embassy was under a coordinated military assault, while it was happening. The White House and State Department later claimed they didn't know. So, given the fact that Petraeus has been summoned to testify before Congress about the debacle, there are obvious motives to get him to change his testimony or reduce his credibility. That's not speculation; that's fact. Whether anyone acted on these motives would be speculation.

b) The one happened shortly after the other, as causes and effects generally do. Petraeus was appointed by a White House which knew about the affair and did nothing. Yet now, immediately after the election and while a Congressional Investigation is ongoing, it's suddenly an issue. This is purely circumstantial, but a fact nonetheless.

c) The White House has quite obviously lied several times about this already, so it's reasonable to assume other unethical acts serving the same motivation may have occurred and will continue to occur. It is logical to consider their actions with healthy skepticism.

But, hey, maybe it's just an alien in your colon. The swelling, pressure on your sphincter, and painful spasms are just circumstantial after all, not "proof" of anything. Guess you'll have to wait and see if an alien bursts out of your gut, hissing. No sense heading toward the rest room or anything. It's a black box, after all. You won't know until you know.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16105
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
Maybe it's a bunny-boiling madwoman trying to hit back at her ex by making him look like a security risk. Maybe a conspiracy to cover up an embassy drone strike authorised by Obama. Maybe aliens.

We just don't know.
I agree. A bunny-boiling madwoman, aliens or an Obama cover-up.

There indeed may be no cover-up. But there was no reason to wait for the resignation until after the election yet before the testimony. Also, it could have easily been stated that he would testify at a later date within the year. But you're right, most likely it's the aliens.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
there was no reason to wait for the resignation until after the election yet before the testimony


How do you know? Maybe there is. I can think of one. It would just be speculation though, like everything else.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
pjp wrote:
there was no reason to wait for the resignation until after the election yet before the testimony


How do you know? Maybe there is. I can think of one. It would just be speculation though, like everything else.

You seem to to be unable to handle reasoning under uncertainty. All things which are not absolutely certain are not equally uncertain. You're like a walking, talking bag of broken logic.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm just generally fascinated by the human capacity for self-delusion.

Even if you point out that no-one knows what's inside the box it won't do any good. People still insist that they know. They have a hunch - and hunches are never wrong, right?

We just can't leave a blank canvas alone. It has to be filled in with something and that "something" is just a reflection of the viewer's limitations and prejudices.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prenj
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
They have a hunch - and hunches are never wrong, right?


You are thinking black-and-white again. Just because hunches can be wrong doesn't imply that they are always wrong. It doesn't even imply "more often than not". Nor otherwise. A tip, don't go studying quantum mechanics, you'd go mad. :lol:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not thinking "black & white". Just thinking.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wildhorse
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 148
Location: Estados Unidos De América

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
mcgruff wrote:
pjp wrote:
there was no reason to wait for the resignation until after the election yet before the testimony


How do you know? Maybe there is. I can think of one. It would just be speculation though, like everything else.

You seem to to be unable to handle reasoning under uncertainty. All things which are not absolutely certain are not equally uncertain. You're like a walking, talking bag of broken logic.
You frequently show a jumping-to-conclusions reasoning bias, whereby your initial probabilistic estimates and your subsequent revision of your hypotheses are frequently made on less evidence than that required by controls.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1564
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 10:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wildhorse wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
mcgruff wrote:
pjp wrote:
there was no reason to wait for the resignation until after the election yet before the testimony


How do you know? Maybe there is. I can think of one. It would just be speculation though, like everything else.

You seem to to be unable to handle reasoning under uncertainty. All things which are not absolutely certain are not equally uncertain. You're like a walking, talking bag of broken logic.
You frequently show a jumping-to-conclusions reasoning bias, whereby your initial probabilistic estimates and your subsequent revision of your hypotheses are frequently made on less evidence than that required by controls.

That's a fair statement, except for the "less evidence than required by controls" part. I don't agree with it, but it's a logical, sensible thing to say, unlike mcgruff's apparently Twilight Zone -like thought processes.
_________________
juniper wrote:
I use ubuntu, which is why I am posting here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
b0nafide
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 17 Feb 2008
Posts: 153
Location: ~/

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 10:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If Bonekracker is correct, I'm sure Petraeus is kicking himself now for lashing out at wikileaks in the past :twisted:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum