the guy that killed bin laden doesn't have a pension or a job. He served 16 years but apparently you have to serve 20 to get a pension.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/bin-laden-shooter-recalls-brains-spilling-face-article-1.1260980?localLinksEnabled=false

Cant paste the article cause theres too many pictures.

SOB

Yeah, that article screams "bullsh*t", Spot. Way to many things in that story that simply do not add up.

1. Why is the mysterious "SEAL" never named? If the guy is supposedly retired then there is no reason for him to not give his name. It's not classified and without a name there is absolutely no way to verify the guy's story. For all we know the article was dreamed up by the author after he smoked way to much reefer while playing Modern Warfare 3 or something.

2. This one is a lot more glaring, because assuming the source was credible (i.e. the guy really is who he says), the only possible reason the man doesn't have veterans benefits is he somehow managed to get dishonorably discharged. If that's the case then he's a scumbag and should be ashamed of himself for lying to the press.

Chard wrote on Feb 12^th, 2013 at 8:00am:

If the guy is supposedly retired then there is no reason for him to not give his name

except that he'll have half of Al qaeda after him and his family.

Chard wrote on Feb 12^th, 2013 at 8:00am:

Yeah, that article screams "bullsh*t", Spot. Way to many things in that story that simply do not add up. 1. Why is the mysterious "SEAL" never named? If the guy is supposedly retired then there is no reason for him to not give his name. It's not classified and without a name there is absolutely no way to verify the guy's story. For all we know the article was dreamed up by the author after he smoked way to much reefer while playing Modern Warfare 3 or something. 2. This one is a lot more glaring, because assuming the source was credible (i.e. the guy really is who he says), the only possible reason the man doesn't have veterans benefits is he somehow managed to get dishonorably discharged. If that's the case then he's a scumbag and should be ashamed of himself for lying to the press.

Look in google news there are lots of sources. he isnt giving his name because he is paranoid. That much is obvious from the article.

SOB

John Smith wrote on Feb 12^th, 2013 at 8:12am:

Chard wrote on Feb 12th, 2013 at 8:00am: If the guy is supposedly retired then there is no reason for him to not give his name except that he'll have half of Al qaeda after him and his family.

Why? I can't think of a single instance in the entire history of US military special warfare where a retired serviceman or their family was placed in any danger after they exit the military. The real world isn't a movie, guy.


Spot, if it's all over the internet then you shouldn't have any problem finding verification of this story from a credible source. A NY Times blog with no verifiable sources isn't a credible source by any reasonable definition.

I thought you woulda looked when i said that . . . .  guess not

I cant load the australian but theres an article there

CNN:  http://edition.cnn.com/2013/02/11/us/esquire-navy-seal/

Telegraph:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/9862975/In-that-second-I-shot-him-Navy-Seal-who-killed-bin-Laden-tells-of-pulling-the-trigger.html

ABC:    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bin-laden-shooter-reportedly-speaks-boom/story?id=18465905

USAtoday:    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/02/11/navy-seal-faces-uncertain-future/1910733/

Cant load NYtimes but theres an article there

New zealand herald:  http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10864889

Any of them "credible"? I couldn't be bothered getting more you can look yourself.

SOB

They all repeat or link to the story in your first post, so that's a no.

I'm telling you flat that there are only two reasons why the alleged SEAL in this story doesn't veterans benefits, Spot. Either he isn't who he says he is or he was dishonorably discharged after general court marshall proceedings for criminal wrong doing. Either the guy is a fraud or he's a criminal and the criminal past doesn't jive with the timeline since I'll be damned if I can think of any specification of charges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice that would not include a jail term short enough that this guy would be out of prison already.

Chard wrote on Feb 12^th, 2013 at 9:56am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 12th, 2013 at 8:12am: Chard wrote on Feb 12th, 2013 at 8:00am: If the guy is supposedly retired then there is no reason for him to not give his name except that he'll have half of Al qaeda after him and his family. Why? I can't think of a single instance in the entire history of US military special warfare where a retired serviceman or their family was placed in any danger after they exit the military. The real world isn't a movie, guy. Spot, if it's all over the internet then you shouldn't have any problem finding verification of this story from a credible source. A NY Times blog with no verifiable sources isn't a credible source by any reasonable definition.

That bit does make sense. The US military probably hasn't seen anything like alqaida before. Most of their nasty enemies probably wanted to keep as low a profile as possible. Killing one of the soldiers who captured bin laden is right up their alley.

freediver wrote on Feb 12^th, 2013 at 7:55pm:

Chard wrote on Feb 12th, 2013 at 9:56am: John Smith wrote on Feb 12th, 2013 at 8:12am: Chard wrote on Feb 12th, 2013 at 8:00am: If the guy is supposedly retired then there is no reason for him to not give his name except that he'll have half of Al qaeda after him and his family. Why? I can't think of a single instance in the entire history of US military special warfare where a retired serviceman or their family was placed in any danger after they exit the military. The real world isn't a movie, guy. Spot, if it's all over the internet then you shouldn't have any problem finding verification of this story from a credible source. A NY Times blog with no verifiable sources isn't a credible source by any reasonable definition. That bit does make sense. The US military probably hasn't seen anything like alqaida before. Most of their nasty enemies probably wanted to keep as low a profile as possible. Killing one of the soldiers who captured bin laden is right up their alley.

We've seen groups like AlQ before that swore up, down, and sideways they'd seek vengence on military personnel.  Every time the threats end right about where our border begins. Seriously, no one is retarded enough to try. In the case of the alleged SEAL from the article your talking about trying to hunt a person with sixteen years of training and experience in a country that has private firearms ownership codified as an inalienable right of its citizens.  AlQ's membership might be cripplingly retarded, but even they aren't that goddamn dumb.

It's not that hard. You just look him up in the phone book, knock on his door and shoot him. If he still wanted to be hiding under under a log he wouldn't have left the army.

freediver wrote on Feb 12^th, 2013 at 9:34pm:

It's not that hard. You just look him up in the phone book, knock on his door and shoot him. If he still wanted to be hiding under under a log he wouldn't have left the army.

You're talking a guy that supposedly spent sixteen years of life as a member of one of the most elite special operations unit in the world, and the last decade of that the guy was operationally deployed so often that there's a fair chance he's probably killed more men than prostate cancer. He's also a US citizen which means he not only has access to firearms, he probably has a permit to carry a concealed weapon depending on what state he lives in. And this is before we get into how difficult it is to find a specific person that doesn't want to be found in a country with over 300, 000, 000  citizens.

Also, he left the US Navy, not the US Army.

Why doesn't he claim the $10 million reward?

Bobby. wrote on Feb 13^th, 2013 at 10:29am:

Why doesn't he claim the $10 million reward?

Because at the time he was US military personnel and ineligible for any monetary awards.

Who needs a pension when he'll make a motza from book sales. It's already in the shops...

freediver wrote on Feb 12^th, 2013 at 9:34pm:

It's not that hard. You just look him up in the phone book, knock on his door and shoot him.

I think you've seen Terminator too many times.  ;D

Chard wrote on Feb 13^th, 2013 at 9:44am:

freediver wrote on Feb 12th, 2013 at 9:34pm: It's not that hard. You just look him up in the phone book, knock on his door and shoot him. If he still wanted to be hiding under under a log he wouldn't have left the army. You're talking a guy that supposedly spent sixteen years of life as a member of one of the most elite special operations unit in the world, and the last decade of that the guy was operationally deployed so often that there's a fair chance he's probably killed more men than prostate cancer. He's also a US citizen which means he not only has access to firearms, he probably has a permit to carry a concealed weapon depending on what state he lives in. And this is before we get into how difficult it is to find a specific person that doesn't want to be found in a country with over 300, 000, 000  citizens. Also, he left the US Navy, not the US Army.

Finding him may be difficult - that was the whole point of not putting his name or photo in the article. Once that is taken care of, it is a simple matter to kill him. No amount of training can help you if someone walks up behind you in the street and shoots you in the back. And I can't see this guy spending all day hiding in the closet in case al quaida is after him. What usually stops people is the difficulty in getting away with it. That obviously isn't a problem for the Islamists.

Chard wrote on Feb 13^th, 2013 at 9:44am:

freediver wrote on Feb 12th, 2013 at 9:34pm: It's not that hard. You just look him up in the phone book, knock on his door and shoot him. If he still wanted to be hiding under under a log he wouldn't have left the army. You're talking a guy that supposedly spent sixteen years of life as a member of one of the most elite special operations unit in the world, and the last decade of that the guy was operationally deployed so often that there's a fair chance he's probably killed more men than prostate cancer.

Bid deal. Been there, done that. And they never gave me a pension either.

F*ck Uncle, f*ck Al Qaida, and f*ck the 3rd Royal Australian Regiment.

The only thing worth fighting for is life.

And that totally explains why every high ranking official, civilian and military hides their identity so the "islamists" won't find them...

Oh, wait, none of them do because there's never, not even once, been a case of islamists or anyone else assassinating active duty or retired personnel in the US. You are wrong and need to stop watching so many bad 1980s action flicks.

Karnal wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 1:03am:

Chard wrote on Feb 13th, 2013 at 9:44am: freediver wrote on Feb 12th, 2013 at 9:34pm: It's not that hard. You just look him up in the phone book, knock on his door and shoot him. If he still wanted to be hiding under under a log he wouldn't have left the army. You're talking a guy that supposedly spent sixteen years of life as a member of one of the most elite special operations unit in the world, and the last decade of that the guy was operationally deployed so often that there's a fair chance he's probably killed more men than prostate cancer. Bid deal. Been there, done that. And they never gave me a pension either. F*ck Uncle, f*ck Al Qaida, and f*ck the 3rd Royal Australian Regiment. The only thing worth fighting for is life.

Maybe you should have got a service related injury / White Card and you you would be sitting back earning $12 / fortnight like me.  ;)

No one enlists for the money and handouts, for that you should have become a politician.

Karnal wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 1:03am:

Chard wrote on Feb 13th, 2013 at 9:44am: freediver wrote on Feb 12th, 2013 at 9:34pm: It's not that hard. You just look him up in the phone book, knock on his door and shoot him. If he still wanted to be hiding under under a log he wouldn't have left the army. You're talking a guy that supposedly spent sixteen years of life as a member of one of the most elite special operations unit in the world, and the last decade of that the guy was operationally deployed so often that there's a fair chance he's probably killed more men than prostate cancer. Bid deal. Been there, done that. And they never gave me a pension either. F*ck Uncle, f*ck Al Qaida, and f*ck the 3rd Royal Australian Regiment. The only thing worth fighting for is life.

Yeah but you are in australia where nobody gets a pension you are 67. That is different in america where you dont get a pension after 16 years but after 20? WTH? Maybe chard can explain it.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 6:59am:

Karnal wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 1:03am: Chard wrote on Feb 13th, 2013 at 9:44am: freediver wrote on Feb 12th, 2013 at 9:34pm: It's not that hard. You just look him up in the phone book, knock on his door and shoot him. If he still wanted to be hiding under under a log he wouldn't have left the army. You're talking a guy that supposedly spent sixteen years of life as a member of one of the most elite special operations unit in the world, and the last decade of that the guy was operationally deployed so often that there's a fair chance he's probably killed more men than prostate cancer. Bid deal. Been there, done that. And they never gave me a pension either. F*ck Uncle, f*ck Al Qaida, and f*ck the 3rd Royal Australian Regiment. The only thing worth fighting for is life. Yeah but you are in australia where nobody gets a pension you are 67. That is different in america where you dont get a pension after 16 years but after 20? WTH? Maybe chard can explain it. SOB

As usual Miss Borg you have NFI.

http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/enablers/centrelink/age-pension/eligibility-for-age-pension

why the bugger do these americans rock up on here?

JC Denton wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 7:24am:

why the bugger do these americans rock up on here?

Why do New Zealanders?

KJT1981 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 7:19am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 6:59am: Karnal wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 1:03am: Chard wrote on Feb 13th, 2013 at 9:44am: freediver wrote on Feb 12th, 2013 at 9:34pm: It's not that hard. You just look him up in the phone book, knock on his door and shoot him. If he still wanted to be hiding under under a log he wouldn't have left the army. You're talking a guy that supposedly spent sixteen years of life as a member of one of the most elite special operations unit in the world, and the last decade of that the guy was operationally deployed so often that there's a fair chance he's probably killed more men than prostate cancer. Bid deal. Been there, done that. And they never gave me a pension either. F*ck Uncle, f*ck Al Qaida, and f*ck the 3rd Royal Australian Regiment. The only thing worth fighting for is life. Yeah but you are in australia where nobody gets a pension you are 67. That is different in america where you dont get a pension after 16 years but after 20? WTH? Maybe chard can explain it. SOB As usual Miss Borg you have NFI. http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/enablers/centrelink/age-pension/eligibility-for-age-pension

Go away troll

Haha your link is to aussie aged pension. Just shows im right.

SOB

Chard wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 1:55am:

And that totally explains why every high ranking official, civilian and military hides their identity so the "islamists" won't find them... Oh, wait, none of them do because there's never, not even once, been a case of islamists or anyone else assassinating active duty or retired personnel in the US. You are wrong and need to stop watching so many bad 1980s action flicks.

none of those high ranking officials or military personnel personally shot Bin Laden ... I know if it was me I wouldn't risk it ...sure chances are they won't do anything, but it would be silly of anyone to risk his family based on a guess. The truth is there are a lot of nut jobs that saw Bin Laden as a hero,  both in and out of the Middle East ... and he would be stupid and irresponsible to take a chance not just with his life but his family... the fact that he survived 16 yrs as a seal in active deployment is probably a good sign that he isn't stupid ... the stupid ones don't last

Chard wrote on Feb 13^th, 2013 at 9:44am:

freediver wrote on Feb 12th, 2013 at 9:34pm: It's not that hard. You just look him up in the phone book, knock on his door and shoot him. If he still wanted to be hiding under under a log he wouldn't have left the army. You're talking a guy that supposedly spent sixteen years of life as a member of one of the most elite special operations unit in the world, and the last decade of that the guy was operationally deployed so often that there's a fair chance he's probably killed more men than prostate cancer. He's also a US citizen which means he not only has access to firearms, he probably has a permit to carry a concealed weapon depending on what state he lives in. And this is before we get into how difficult it is to find a specific person that doesn't want to be found in a country with over 300, 000, 000  citizens. Also, he left the US Navy, not the US Army.

It would probably take a good P.I. a week.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 6:59am:

Yeah but you are in australia where nobody gets a pension you are 67. That is different in america where you dont get a pension after 16 years but after 20? WTH? Maybe chard can explain it. SOB

Only you could be totally confused by the fact that you don't get a 20 yr sevice pension at 16 years.  ;D   


It was only in the last few years that Aussie service personnel stopped getting thier 20 year service pensions. Livin the dream on 5/8 of bugger all for the rest of your life, which for the average serviceman was less than the dole or the proper pension.

KJT1981 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 7:58am:

JC Denton wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 7:24am: why the bugger do these americans rock up on here? Why do New Zealanders?

the nzers actually live here though and lets face it its the same country anyway.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 9:49am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 6:59am: Yeah but you are in australia where nobody gets a pension you are 67. That is different in america where you dont get a pension after 16 years but after 20? WTH? Maybe chard can explain it. SOB Only you could be totally confused by the fact that you don't get a 20 yr sevice pension at 16 years.  ;D    It was only in the last few years that Aussie service personnel stopped getting thier 20 year service pensions. Livin the dream on 5/8 of bugger all for the rest of your life, which for the average serviceman was less than the dole or the proper pension.

Yeah thats right - pretend to be confused and think im talking about a 20 year pension @ 16. Why do you have to try and twist things? Do you have nothing to add perhaps? Why not a 16 year pension? I happen to know that you get a pension @ 6 years except you have to wait until you are pension age to claim it. Argh i gotta go

SOB

Chard wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 1:55am:

there's never, not even once, been a case of islamists or anyone else assassinating active duty or retired personnel in the US.

Oh really? Fort Hood is not in the US? Malik Hassan didn't kill 13 US soldiers and army personnel, also wounding 29? He wasn't shouting Allahu Akhbar while killing and wounding them?

Chard wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 1:55am:

And that totally explains why every high ranking official, civilian and military hides their identity so the "islamists" won't find them... Oh, wait, none of them do because there's never, not even once, been a case of islamists or anyone else assassinating active duty or retired personnel in the US. You are wrong and need to stop watching so many bad 1980s action flicks.

Yes, and killing Osama was also a first. This is a different kind of war.


Bertram wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 11:16am:

Chard wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 1:55am: there's never, not even once, been a case of islamists or anyone else assassinating active duty or retired personnel in the US. Oh really? Fort Hood is not in the US? Malik Hassan didn't kill 13 US soldiers and army personnel, also wounding 29? He wasn't shouting Allahu Akhbar while killing and wounding them?

But they were trained servicemen. Surely someone couldn't just walk up to them and start shooting? Aren't they taught to dodge bullets or something?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 10:59am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 9:49am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 6:59am: Yeah but you are in australia where nobody gets a pension you are 67. That is different in america where you dont get a pension after 16 years but after 20? WTH? Maybe chard can explain it. SOB Only you could be totally confused by the fact that you don't get a 20 yr sevice pension at 16 years.  ;D    It was only in the last few years that Aussie service personnel stopped getting thier 20 year service pensions. Livin the dream on 5/8 of bugger all for the rest of your life, which for the average serviceman was less than the dole or the proper pension. Yeah thats right - pretend to be confused and think im talking about a 20 year pension @ 16. Why do you have to try and twist things? Do you have nothing to add perhaps? Why not a 16 year pension? I happen to know that you get a pension @ 6 years except you have to wait until you are pension age to claim it. Argh i gotta go SOB

Because it is 20 years, not 16 or 6 but 20. It does not  affect you so why the tears? It's not like you have served in any military service for any country so the allocation of service pensions isn't really any of your concern, now is it?


Please if you are going to make sh1t up try to not be too outrageous, or at least find a dodgy link (YouTube is quite fashionable these days) to use as 'evidence'.  ;D

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 8:59am:

KJT1981 wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 7:19am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 6:59am: Karnal wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 1:03am: Chard wrote on Feb 13th, 2013 at 9:44am: freediver wrote on Feb 12th, 2013 at 9:34pm: It's not that hard. You just look him up in the phone book, knock on his door and shoot him. If he still wanted to be hiding under under a log he wouldn't have left the army. You're talking a guy that supposedly spent sixteen years of life as a member of one of the most elite special operations unit in the world, and the last decade of that the guy was operationally deployed so often that there's a fair chance he's probably killed more men than prostate cancer. Bid deal. Been there, done that. And they never gave me a pension either. F*ck Uncle, f*ck Al Qaida, and f*ck the 3rd Royal Australian Regiment. The only thing worth fighting for is life. Yeah but you are in australia where nobody gets a pension you are 67. That is different in america where you dont get a pension after 16 years but after 20? WTH? Maybe chard can explain it. SOB As usual Miss Borg you have NFI. http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/enablers/centrelink/age-pension/eligibility-for-age-pension Go away troll Haha your link is to aussie aged pension. Just shows im right. SOB

No Miss Borg, it shows you are friggen wrong.

Go back and read it again.

KJT1981 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 7:58am:

JC Denton wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 7:24am: why the bugger do these americans rock up on here? Why do New Zealanders?

No no, Matty doesn’t post from New Zealand. They don’t have the internet there.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 12:33pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 10:59am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 9:49am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 6:59am: Yeah but you are in australia where nobody gets a pension you are 67. That is different in america where you dont get a pension after 16 years but after 20? WTH? Maybe chard can explain it. SOB Only you could be totally confused by the fact that you don't get a 20 yr sevice pension at 16 years.  ;D    It was only in the last few years that Aussie service personnel stopped getting thier 20 year service pensions. Livin the dream on 5/8 of bugger all for the rest of your life, which for the average serviceman was less than the dole or the proper pension. Yeah thats right - pretend to be confused and think im talking about a 20 year pension @ 16. Why do you have to try and twist things? Do you have nothing to add perhaps? Why not a 16 year pension? I happen to know that you get a pension @ 6 years except you have to wait until you are pension age to claim it. Argh i gotta go SOB Because it is 20 years, not 16 or 6 but 20. It does not  affect you so why the tears? It's not like you have served in any military service for any country so the allocation of service pensions isn't really any of your concern, now is it? Please if you are going to make sh1t up try to not be too outrageous, or at least find a dodgy link (YouTube is quite fashionable these days) to use as 'evidence'.  ;D

Why are you lying? And you wouldn't have a clue what i have or havent done.

My post wasnt about australia it was about the seal guy that killed bin laden,. '?You would think he would get a pension.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 2:27pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 12:33pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 10:59am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 9:49am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 6:59am: Yeah but you are in australia where nobody gets a pension you are 67. That is different in america where you dont get a pension after 16 years but after 20? WTH? Maybe chard can explain it. SOB Only you could be totally confused by the fact that you don't get a 20 yr sevice pension at 16 years.  ;D    It was only in the last few years that Aussie service personnel stopped getting thier 20 year service pensions. Livin the dream on 5/8 of bugger all for the rest of your life, which for the average serviceman was less than the dole or the proper pension. Yeah thats right - pretend to be confused and think im talking about a 20 year pension @ 16. Why do you have to try and twist things? Do you have nothing to add perhaps? Why not a 16 year pension? I happen to know that you get a pension @ 6 years except you have to wait until you are pension age to claim it. Argh i gotta go SOB Because it is 20 years, not 16 or 6 but 20. It does not  affect you so why the tears? It's not like you have served in any military service for any country so the allocation of service pensions isn't really any of your concern, now is it? Please if you are going to make sh1t up try to not be too outrageous, or at least find a dodgy link (YouTube is quite fashionable these days) to use as 'evidence'.  ;D Why are you lying? And you wouldn't have a clue what i have or havent done. My post wasnt about australia it was about the seal guy that killed bin laden,. '?You would think he would get a pension. SOB

I know your type very well, you have NEVER served a day in your life.  :)


I was also talking about the Navy Seal and US 20 yr service pensions, otherwise I would have stated so.


He and everyone else who has served in the various froces throughout the world that still have 20 year pensions, get their 20 year pension at 20 years an no sooner.


Everyone who enlists in the militart knows this, even if it confounds and distresses you.

freediver wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 11:36am:

Yes, and killing Osama was also a first.

We've been fighting AlQ for over over decade now, closer to two decades if you count all the times President Clinton ordered the US Navy to fire
Tomohawks at AlQ training sites. If AlQ was actually serious about killing ex-servicemen they'd have sacked the hell up and done it already.



freediver wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 11:36am:

This is a different kind of war.

No, it really isn't a different kind of was. Fighting insurgencies and terrorist isn't even remotely new to warfare.


freediver wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 11:36am:

Oh really? Fort Hood is not in the US? Malik Hassan didn't kill 13 US soldiers and army personnel, also wounding 29? He wasn't shouting Allahu Akhbar while killing and wounding them?

Major Hassan wasn't a smacking member of Al Qaeda.  He was a terrible soldier and an even worse officer. His fitness reports were such that Army was planning to chapter the guy out. How the f*ck you got assassination by Al Qaeda from a disgruntled soldier going full retard and shooting other personnel is the kind of jump to conclusion that involves catapults.

And BigOl64 brings up the third reason for why this guy doesn't have retirement benefits. The only was you're entitled to a pension is if you serve twenty years or more. If true then this guy is a smacking idiot for not serving his full twenty.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 3:39pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 2:27pm: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 12:33pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 10:59am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 9:49am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 6:59am: Yeah but you are in australia where nobody gets a pension you are 67. That is different in america where you dont get a pension after 16 years but after 20? WTH? Maybe chard can explain it. SOB Only you could be totally confused by the fact that you don't get a 20 yr sevice pension at 16 years.  ;D    It was only in the last few years that Aussie service personnel stopped getting thier 20 year service pensions. Livin the dream on 5/8 of bugger all for the rest of your life, which for the average serviceman was less than the dole or the proper pension. Yeah thats right - pretend to be confused and think im talking about a 20 year pension @ 16. Why do you have to try and twist things? Do you have nothing to add perhaps? Why not a 16 year pension? I happen to know that you get a pension @ 6 years except you have to wait until you are pension age to claim it. Argh i gotta go SOB Because it is 20 years, not 16 or 6 but 20. It does not  affect you so why the tears? It's not like you have served in any military service for any country so the allocation of service pensions isn't really any of your concern, now is it? Please if you are going to make sh1t up try to not be too outrageous, or at least find a dodgy link (YouTube is quite fashionable these days) to use as 'evidence'.  ;D Why are you lying? And you wouldn't have a clue what i have or havent done. My post wasnt about australia it was about the seal guy that killed bin laden,. '?You would think he would get a pension. SOB I know your type very well, you have NEVER served a day in your life.  :) I was also talking about the Navy Seal and US 20 yr service pensions, otherwise I would have stated so. He and everyone else who has served in the various froces throughout the world that still have 20 year pensions, get their 20 year pension at 20 years an no sooner. Everyone who enlists in the militart knows this, even if it confounds and distresses you.

And what exactly is "my type"?

I know "your type" too. You are the ones that think you know everything about everyone without any evidence or reasoning whatsoever. Just "feelings" i expect. Of course you are always wrong but you will never admit it and never ever ever apologise because thats a sign of "weakness".

SOB

Chard wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 3:46pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 11:36am: Yes, and killing Osama was also a first. We've been fighting AlQ for over over decade now, closer to two decades if you count all the times President Clinton ordered the US Navy to fire Tomohawks at AlQ training sites. If AlQ was actually serious about killing ex-servicemen they'd have sacked the hell up and done it already. freediver wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 11:36am: This is a different kind of war. No, it really isn't a different kind of was. Fighting insurgencies and terrorist isn't even remotely new to warfare. freediver wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 11:36am: Oh really? Fort Hood is not in the US? Malik Hassan didn't kill 13 US soldiers and army personnel, also wounding 29? He wasn't shouting Allahu Akhbar while killing and wounding them? Major Hassan wasn't a smacking member of Al Qaeda.  He was a terrible soldier and an even worse officer. His fitness reports were such that Army was planning to chapter the guy out. How the f*ck you got assassination by Al Qaeda from a disgruntled soldier going full retard and shooting other personnel is the kind of jump to conclusion that involves catapults.

Silly me. I forgot there are only two types of war and anything that can be categorised as either type cannot be new.

freediver wrote on Feb 17^th, 2013 at 9:08am:

Silly me. I forgot there are only two types of war and anything that can be categorised as either type cannot be new.

No, moron, I said that counter insurgency and counter terror aren't new to warfare. But now that you mention it, no, there aren't, t any new forms of warfare either. It's been done before.

Chard wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 3:46pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 11:36am: Yes, and killing Osama was also a first. We've been fighting AlQ for over over decade now, closer to two decades if you count all the times President Clinton ordered the US Navy to fire Tomohawks at AlQ training sites. If AlQ was actually serious about killing ex-servicemen they'd have sacked the hell up and done it already. freediver wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 11:36am: This is a different kind of war. No, it really isn't a different kind of was. Fighting insurgencies and terrorist isn't even remotely new to warfare. freediver wrote on Feb 16th, 2013 at 11:36am: Oh really? Fort Hood is not in the US? Malik Hassan didn't kill 13 US soldiers and army personnel, also wounding 29? He wasn't shouting Allahu Akhbar while killing and wounding them? Major Hassan wasn't a smacking member of Al Qaeda.  He was a terrible soldier and an even worse officer. His fitness reports were such that Army was planning to chapter the guy out. How the f*ck you got assassination by Al Qaeda from a disgruntled soldier going full retard and shooting other personnel is the kind of jump to conclusion that involves catapults.

Here's what you actually said, to which freediver gave you a very good response by pointing to the Fort Hood islamist's massacre of active duty US military personnel in the US.

Do pay attention, at least to what you yourself say.



Chard wrote on Feb 16^th, 2013 at 1:55am:

And that totally explains why every high ranking official, civilian and military hides their identity so the "islamists" won't find them... Oh, wait, none of them do because there's never, not even once, been a case of islamists or anyone else assassinating active duty or retired personnel in the US. You are wrong and need to stop watching so many bad 1980s action flicks.

Soren, if you believe the term "assassin" applies to spree killers like Hassen then you're every bit as delusional as Freediver.

Chard wrote on Feb 18^th, 2013 at 2:15pm:

Soren, if you believe the term "assassin" applies to spree killers like Hassen then you're every bit as delusional as Freediver.

Yeah, sorry Soren..but spree killers are usually  sociopaths/psychopaths..

Assassins are generally paid professionals.

Chard wrote on Feb 18^th, 2013 at 2:15pm:

Soren, if you believe the term "assassin" applies to spree killers like Hassen then you're every bit as delusional as Freediver.

He killed in the name of Islam. He was an islamist. He fits your own description.
Assassin, killer, murderer, terrorist, infiltrator, sleeper cell- is hat what you are now debting?

American soldiers have been killed in America by an Islamist. Your "never ever, not once" is incorrect.

BTW, was there any active or retired militart personnel on any of the aircraft or in the Pentagon on 11 September 2001? Or targeting the entire ministry of defence doesn't count ?

Chard wrote on Feb 18^th, 2013 at 3:04am:

freediver wrote on Feb 17th, 2013 at 9:08am: Silly me. I forgot there are only two types of war and anything that can be categorised as either type cannot be new. No, moron, I said that counter insurgency and counter terror aren't new to warfare. But now that you mention it, no, there aren't, t any new forms of warfare either. It's been done before.

So what is your point? Is this a new kind of war or not? If not, is it because you can categorise it in a category that already exists?

freediver wrote on Feb 18^th, 2013 at 7:53pm:

So what is your point?

Same as it was when I first told you that your belief that Al Queda represents a new form of warfare was wrong.



freediver wrote on Feb 18^th, 2013 at 7:53pm:

Is this a new kind of war or not?

Really? I already answered that.



freediver wrote on Feb 18^th, 2013 at 7:53pm:

If not, is it because you can categorise it in a category that already exists?

If you have a system for categorizing a thing it's usually a good indication that whatever that thing is probably isn't new. The concept of an insurgency and how to fight as part of one or against one is incredibly old. For f*ck's sake, the Roman Empire dealt with multiple insurgencies (the also had this habit of nailing insurgents to a cross).

Counter-terrorism has existed almost as long as the concept of terrorism. I can give specific examples of both going clear back to ancient Egypt, with my personal favorite being the Biblical account of Moses and God playing around with elementary biological warfare to mass murder while attempting to convince the Pharoh to set the Jews free. Granted, that biblical account is grade-a bullshit, but it's ok since much more historically accurate and valid accounts of terrorism exist from the period.

Point is you are the wrongest human being in the history of wrong human beings. There is nothing new in warfare. It has all been done before, either as a theoretical exorcise or a real live shooting war.

Soren wrote on Feb 18^th, 2013 at 3:08pm:

Chard wrote on Feb 18th, 2013 at 2:15pm: Soren, if you believe the term "assassin" applies to spree killers like Hassen then you're every bit as delusional as Freediver. He killed in the name of Islam. He was an islamist. He fits your own description. Assassin, killer, murderer, terrorist, infiltrator, sleeper cell- is hat what you are now debting? American soldiers have been killed in America by an Islamist. Your "never ever, not once" is incorrect. BTW, was there any active or retired militart personnel on any of the aircraft or in the Pentagon on 11 September 2001? Or targeting the entire ministry of defence doesn't count ?

The best part is you not only quoted me saying "assassinating", your dumbass bolded and high-lighted where I said it. Yet some how "assassination" gets changed to "killing", which tells me that you either don't know the difference between the terms "assassinate" and "kill" or you're a massively dishonest tool.

So which is it, Soren? Are you merely ignorant or are you lying prick? Inquiring minds want to k... ah, just kidding.I already know the answer to that, you douche.

Ahh chard i see you discovered fd and sorens dishonest way of "debating".

SOB

The Fort Hood shooter wasn't a random spree killer. He didn't go down to an intersection at 11 am and started shooting randomly.

He killed active duty American soldiers for political reason, in the name of Islam, after infiltrating and pretending to be someone he wasn't. He selected active duty soldiers on American soil for maximum political and ideological impact. Payment is irrelevant.

That fits the requirements of assassination.These soldiers were targeted for who they were and where they were and your tantrum makes a difference to these facts.
Or your anal retentive hairsplitting about what is in YOUR dictionary. If it's not Bruce Willis a the jackl an it's not assassination.

Assassination IS a type of killing. What is most important about it is that it is done by infiltration, by getting close to a protected target under false pretences, not that you must ave heard about the target or that payment was received for the killing. Which is what happened at Fort Hood, no matter how much you spit and splutter on your keyboard.

Soren wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 11:00am:

He killed active duty American soldiers for political reason, in the name of Islam, after infiltrating and pretending to be someone he wasn't. He selected active duty soldiers on American soil for maximum political and ideological impact. Payment is irrelevant.

Really? You might want to share your findings with the US Department of Defense then. Because the investigation into Hasan hasn't turned up any evidence of this bring a terrorist act, haven't found any co-conspirators, or any evidence that supports your claim.

So not only are you a dishonest twatwaffle, you're smacking delusional as well.

Chard wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 11:54am:

Soren wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 11:00am: He killed active duty American soldiers for political reason, in the name of Islam, after infiltrating and pretending to be someone he wasn't. He selected active duty soldiers on American soil for maximum political and ideological impact. Payment is irrelevant. Really? You might want to share your findings with the US Department of Defense then. Because the investigation into Hasan hasn't turned up any evidence of this bring a terrorist act, haven't found any co-conspirators, or any evidence that supports your claim. So not only are you a dishonest twatwaffle, you're smacking delusional as well.

Yeah, he was shouting Allahu Akhbar as he was killing them and as every US Department of Defence Diversity Officer knows, that means 'nothing to see here, folks, move along' in Arabic.
Good one, pal.

"And barely had he got to Texas when he started making idle chit-chat praising the jihadist murderer of two soldiers outside a recruitment centre in Little Rock. “This is what Muslims should do, stand up to the aggressors,” Major Hasan told his superior officer, Colonel Terry Lee. “People should strap bombs on themselves and go into Times Square.”

In less enlightened times, Colonel Lee would have concluded that, being in favour of the murder of his comrades, Major Hasan was objectively on the side of the enemy. But instead he merely cautioned the major against saying things that might give people the wrong impression. Which is to say, the right impression.
This is your brain on political correctness.

“You need to lock it up, major,” advised the colonel.

But, of course, he didn’t. He could pretty much say what he wanted—infidels should have their throats cut, for example. Meanwhile, the only ones who felt any “need to lock it up” were his fellow psychiatrists, his patients, his teachers at the Uniformed Services University, officials at Walter Reed, and the brass at Fort Hood. So they locked it up for years, and now 14 people are dead.
..
Major Hasan sent fortnightly emails to Anwar al-Awlaki, sometime spiritual adviser to both the Fort Hood shooter and three of the 9/11 terrorists and an imam so radical he’s banned from Britain, a land with an otherwise all but boundless tolerance for radical imams. In his leisure hours, he adopted the Pushtun dress of those Arabs who journeyed to Afghanistan to sign up with Osama. And eventually the sheer accumulation of such revelations rendered the Post Traumatic Stress Disorder thesis so absurd that even Frank Rich of the New York Times was willing to muse tentatively on whether the major’s years of jihadist exhibitionism were “ignored because of political correctness, bureaucratic dysfunction, sheer incompetence or some hybrid thereof.”
http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/11/26/major-nidal-hasan-had-an-enabler/

Chard wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 2:32am:

freediver wrote on Feb 18th, 2013 at 7:53pm: So what is your point? Same as it was when I first told you that your belief that Al Queda represents a new form of warfare was wrong. freediver wrote on Feb 18th, 2013 at 7:53pm: Is this a new kind of war or not? Really? I already answered that. freediver wrote on Feb 18th, 2013 at 7:53pm: If not, is it because you can categorise it in a category that already exists? If you have a system for categorizing a thing it's usually a good indication that whatever that thing is probably isn't new. The concept of an insurgency and how to fight as part of one or against one is incredibly old. For f*ck's sake, the Roman Empire dealt with multiple insurgencies (the also had this habit of nailing insurgents to a cross). Counter-terrorism has existed almost as long as the concept of terrorism. I can give specific examples of both going clear back to ancient Egypt, with my personal favorite being the Biblical account of Moses and God playing around with elementary biological warfare to mass murder while attempting to convince the Pharoh to set the Jews free. Granted, that biblical account is grade-a bullshit, but it's ok since much more historically accurate and valid accounts of terrorism exist from the period. Point is you are the wrongest human being in the history of wrong human beings. There is nothing new in warfare. It has all been done before, either as a theoretical exorcise or a real live shooting war.

Chard, I am not saying that this is the first war we have ever had, or the first counter insurgency. That does not mean that it isn't something new, especially in the context of the risk to this soldiers life, were his name and photo to get plastered all over the internet. I suppose this point is a bit too subtle for you.

It's the first war where one side's objective is to remain Politically Correct at any price.

freediver wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 12:36pm:

Chard, I am not saying that this is the first war we have ever had, or the first counter insurgency. That does not mean that it isn't something new, especially in the context of the risk to this soldiers life, were his name and photo to get plastered all over the internet. I suppose this point is a bit too subtle for you.

What about any of that is "new"? You can't show a single bit of this that is new. You support any of your claims and when you try it fails horribly. That's before you hilariously fumble over your thesaurus trying to play lame semantics games.

Seriously, is it really that hard for you to admit you were wrong and move on?

Aw... Poor widdle Soren has to post crap journalism because he's to dumb to understand that the Department of the Army concluded that Hasan acted alone and that his religion had nothing to do with his actions then to act as an attempt at mucking up his trial. Doesn't matter what magazine you post, the US Army thinks you're full of sh*t and since they're the people putting Hasan on trial I'm more inclined to believe the conclusions of a CID investigation then the postings of some moron that can't tell the difference between "killing" and "assassination".

P.S. eat a bowl dicks.

Chard wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 5:59pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 12:36pm: Chard, I am not saying that this is the first war we have ever had, or the first counter insurgency. That does not mean that it isn't something new, especially in the context of the risk to this soldiers life, were his name and photo to get plastered all over the internet. I suppose this point is a bit too subtle for you. What about any of that is "new"? You can't show a single bit of this that is new. You support any of your claims and when you try it fails horribly. That's before you hilariously fumble over your thesaurus trying to play lame semantics games. Seriously, is it really that hard for you to admit you were wrong and move on?

You are the one that got hung up on semantics, not me. The differences seem pretty obvious to me. I cannot think of any historical counter insurgency that even comes close to the war on Islamic extremism.

Chard wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 6:10pm:

Aw... Poor widdle Soren has to post crap journalism because he's to dumb to understand that the Department of the Army concluded that Hasan acted alone and that his religion had nothing to do with his actions then to act as an attempt at mucking up his trial. Doesn't matter what magazine you post, the US Army thinks you're full of sh*t and since they're the people putting Hasan on trial I'm more inclined to believe the conclusions of a CID investigation then the postings of some moron that can't tell the difference between "killing" and "assassination". P.S. eat a bowl dicks.

If the West is fooked it is because of the people like you who will believe a Department of Political Correctness report rather than their own lying eyes and ears.  Shouting Allahu Akhbar while shooting your fellow Americans means, to you and the Dept of PC,  that the religion of Islamic has nuffin' to do wiv nuffin'.

No wonder you guys are written off by so many. If you are the fooking Voice of America, then we are all buggered.

But thankfully, you are not. You are just a silly pizzle who swallowed a dictionary 10 years ago and is dining out, so to speak,  on the experience ever since. i

Yes, Soren, never mind facts when you can wildly gesticulate and mumble pathetic bullshit about political correctness. Of course we shouldn't pay any heed to thee outcome of an investigation, the guy shouted something according to anecdote so it must be RAR TERR'ISM! If I didn't already know your nationality I would swear you're one of the semi-literate trailertrash swine that make up the bulk of the GOP's voter base.

Chard wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 8:27pm:

Yes, Soren, never mind facts when you can wildly gesticulate and mumble pathetic bullshit about political correctness. Of course we shouldn't pay any heed to thee outcome of an investigation, the guy shouted something according to anecdote so it must be RAR TERR'ISM! If I didn't already know your nationality I would swear you're one of the semi-literate trailertrash swine that make up the bulk of the GOP's voter base.

Soldiers who witnessed the shooting rampage that killed 13 people at Fort Hood military base in Texas have reported that gunman Major Nidal Malik Hasan shouted "Allahu Akbar" before opening fire.


What do you think 'Allahu Akbar' means, when shouted by a Muslim opening fire on a room full of infidel Americans?
Or is it meaningless unless its meaning is approved by Barry Hussein?

I don't want to make fun your being an American (if indeed you are an American) but god knows, you are sorely tempting me.

Perhaps this is why Chard has such trouble recognising any novelty in this war. He can't even see it happening.

Chard wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 8:27pm:

If I didn't already know your nationality I would swear you're one of the semi-literate trailertrash swine that make up the bulk of the GOP's voter base.

You don't know my nationality - you limit is thinking 'not an American Obama kid' - which is a very questionable category as you have 9 million 'not Americans' in America - most of them, predictably, Obama kids.
Anyway, GOP = trailer trash - I can see that the morons have successfully colonised your mind. There are plenty of similarly twisted kids on this forum - SOB, Adelcrow, perthsomethingorother, Karnal, nail, skippy, corporate whitey (I recommend him to you, he's a soulmate of yours), Emma, MOTR, Buzz  and many others too numerous to list.
When you insist on being an idiot like you do, you never walk alone  - as they say in Liverpool (I am quoting from memory).

freediver wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 8:45pm:

Perhaps this is why Chard has such trouble recognising any novelty in this war. He can't even see it happening.

Perhaps.

But there are a lot of dangerous perhapses.

Perhaps this is peace in our time. Perhaps they will not cut my head off if I smile at them. Perhaps I should put on the veil to keep the peace. Perhaps I should not publish that cartoon, that essay, stage that play, have that conference. Perhaps it's my fault that they can't take a joke.

Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps. All very dangerous perhapses.

Not quite Doris Day, is it? In the 60s it was an exciting fissure to come across a Mediterranean, Italian, foreign chappie. It was all garlic, hairnets, strong coffee and Cinzano.

Now, foreign means slaughtering a goat for Ramadan in the bathtub on the third floor, demanding veiling an cliteroctomy for women, and beheading for anyone who thinks ill of any of this- or the wafting smell of curry for breakfast, lunch and dinner, turbans and pajamas, if you are lucky.


Australian customs, habits, traditions? Don't ever mention them coz you're a racist if you do.

Soren wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 8:43pm:

What do you think 'Allahu Akbar' means, when shouted by a Muslim opening fire on a room full of infidel Americans?

Doesn't really mean anything except that Hasan s probably a Muslim. Turns out that the United States Army CID agrees with me. See, unlike you, we're not retarded enough to assume that since someone yelled something that it must be the reason that person did that thing.

Here's the big clue, the prosecution doesn't think Hasan acted out of religious motivation. They think he's a terrible soldier who wax about to get chaptered out who then decided to cop a case of Sudden Jihad Syndrome in order to geg out of a deployment. When Hasan was told "we don't care, get on the goddamn plane. By the way, you're never making Lieutenant Colonel" Hasan then went apeshit because his career just got ran over by a tank.

But who cares about petty stuff like facts when you can be a racist bugger and assume that anyone that's brown and says "allah" must be a terrorist.

freediver wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 8:45pm:

Perhaps this is why Chard has such trouble recognising any novelty in this war. He can't even see it happening.

Hey, when you're done slurping Soren's flaccid member could you be a pal and give specific examples of what exactly it is you think is new or novel already? You keep saying new an d novel bust you have yet to show anything that could be considered new and/or novel.

Soren wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 9:00pm:

Chard wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 8:27pm: If I didn't already know your nationality I would swear you're one of the semi-literate trailertrash swine that make up the bulk of the GOP's voter base. You don't know my nationality - you limit is thinking 'not an American Obama kid' - which is a very questionable category as you have 9 million 'not Americans' in America - most of them, predictably, Obama kids. Anyway, GOP = trailer trash - I can see that the morons have successfully colonised your mind. There are plenty of similarly twisted kids on this forum - SOB, Adelcrow, perthsomethingorother, Karnal, nail, skippy, corporate whitey (I recommend him to you, he's a soulmate of yours), Emma, MOTR, Buzz  and many others too numerous to list. When you insist on being an idiot like you do, you never walk alone  - as they say in Liverpool (I am quoting from memory).

Why do you trolls always try to assign partisan politics to me?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 5:50am:

Soren wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 9:00pm: Chard wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 8:27pm: If I didn't already know your nationality I would swear you're one of the semi-literate trailertrash swine that make up the bulk of the GOP's voter base. You don't know my nationality - you limit is thinking 'not an American Obama kid' - which is a very questionable category as you have 9 million 'not Americans' in America - most of them, predictably, Obama kids. Anyway, GOP = trailer trash - I can see that the morons have successfully colonised your mind. There are plenty of similarly twisted kids on this forum - SOB, Adelcrow, perthsomethingorother, Karnal, nail, skippy, corporate whitey (I recommend him to you, he's a soulmate of yours), Emma, MOTR, Buzz  and many others too numerous to list. When you insist on being an idiot like you do, you never walk alone  - as they say in Liverpool (I am quoting from memory). Why do you trolls always try to assign partisan politics to me? SOB

We don't. We just think you are an idiot. Well, I think you are an idiot. Case in point: a twisted mind (which is what I assigned to you) is not partisan politics, numpty.

Spot, I really wouldn't pay much attention to Soren. He's just butthurt because reality doesn't jive with his narrow minded, bigoted world view. Think Rampage, only as a clueless dipshit racist instead of a clueless dipshit Belgian.

i second the notion that spot is an idiot

Chard wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 4:44am:

Soren wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 8:43pm: What do you think 'Allahu Akbar' means, when shouted by a Muslim opening fire on a room full of infidel Americans? Doesn't really mean anything except that Hasan s probably a Muslim. Turns out that the United States Army CID agrees with me. See, unlike you, we're not retarded enough to assume that since someone yelled something that it must be the reason that person did that thing. Here's the big clue, the prosecution doesn't think Hasan acted out of religious motivation. They think he's a terrible soldier who wax about to get chaptered out who then decided to cop a case of Sudden Jihad Syndrome in order to geg out of a deployment. When Hasan was told "we don't care, get on the goddamn plane. By the way, you're never making Lieutenant Colonel" Hasan then went apeshit because his career just got ran over by a tank. But who cares about petty stuff like facts when you can be a racist bugger and assume that anyone that's brown and says "allah" must be a terrorist.

Sure thing, pal. All just coincidence and conjecture. Keep in close contact with a big shot jihadi, proselise for Islam, tell all and sundry about infidels, identify yourself as a Soldier of Allah on your business card, shout like a jihadi when killing American soldiers, grow a jihadi beard in jail and and refuse to shave it although the judge orders you to, have your actions praised by jihadis as exemplary - do all that and still be classified as  perpetrator of 'workplace violence'. Nothing to see here, folks. All insignificant coincidence.
The US ambassador is dragged to is death in Benghazi on the anniversary of September 11? Coincidence and jihad has nuffin' to do wiv nuffin'. Why, that was just a prank call gone wrong by some punk kids het up over an amateur video.  America has no enemies, only friends whose grievances you haven't accommodated yet.

Chard wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 7:26am:

Spot, I really wouldn't pay much attention to Soren. He's just butthurt because reality doesn't jive with his narrow minded, bigoted world view. Think Rampage, only as a clueless dipshit racist instead of a clueless dipshit Belgian.

Ahhh!!! You have found each other!  You have so much in common, you'll be happy together.

Soren wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 7:12am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 5:50am: Soren wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 9:00pm: Chard wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 8:27pm: If I didn't already know your nationality I would swear you're one of the semi-literate trailertrash swine that make up the bulk of the GOP's voter base. You don't know my nationality - you limit is thinking 'not an American Obama kid' - which is a very questionable category as you have 9 million 'not Americans' in America - most of them, predictably, Obama kids. Anyway, GOP = trailer trash - I can see that the morons have successfully colonised your mind. There are plenty of similarly twisted kids on this forum - SOB, Adelcrow, perthsomethingorother, Karnal, nail, skippy, corporate whitey (I recommend him to you, he's a soulmate of yours), Emma, MOTR, Buzz  and many others too numerous to list. When you insist on being an idiot like you do, you never walk alone  - as they say in Liverpool (I am quoting from memory). Why do you trolls always try to assign partisan politics to me? SOB We don't. We just think you are an idiot. Well, I think you are an idiot. Case in point: a twisted mind (which is what I assigned to you) is not partisan politics, numpty.

You called me an "obama kid".

SOB

JC Denton wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 7:31am:

i second the notion that spot is an idiot

Awww another troll that doesnt like me im heartbroken

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 8:47am:

You called me an "obama kid". SOB

I didn't, you phosphorescent cretin. I called you an idiot with a twisted mind. I said Chad thinks in categories of 'obama kid/tea party' and so he is an idiot with a twisted mind like you. You are both idiots but for different reasons.
In any case, you couldn't be an obama kid in Brisbane even if you wanted to be, you silly ass.

Soren wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 8:54am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 8:47am: You called me an "obama kid". SOB I didn't, you phosphorescent cretin. I called you an idiot with a twisted mind. I said Chad thinks in categories of 'obama kid/tea party' and so he is an idiot with a twisted mind like you. You are both idiots but for different reasons. In any case, you couldn't be an obama kid in Brisbane even if you wanted to be, you silly ass.

You claim to be a psychologist or psychiatrist and you don't even recognise when you yourself are projecting.

SOB

Chard wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 4:49am:

freediver wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 8:45pm: Perhaps this is why Chard has such trouble recognising any novelty in this war. He can't even see it happening. Hey, when you're done slurping Soren's flaccid member could you be a pal and give specific examples of what exactly it is you think is new or novel already? You keep saying new an d novel bust you have yet to show anything that could be considered new and/or novel.

Likewise, you are yet to come up with a previous war that compares. I am sure that whatever examples I give you will completely miss the point and give a 'counter-example' of a war that you place in the same category, yet was nothing at all like the current one.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:09am:

Soren wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 8:54am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 8:47am: You called me an "obama kid". SOB I didn't, you phosphorescent cretin. I called you an idiot with a twisted mind. I said Chad thinks in categories of 'obama kid/tea party' and so he is an idiot with a twisted mind like you. You are both idiots but for different reasons. In any case, you couldn't be an obama kid in Brisbane even if you wanted to be, you silly ass. You claim to be a psychologist or psychiatrist and you don't even recognise when you yourself are projecting. SOB

What am I projecting?  In which countries?

SOB

Soren wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 9:16pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 8:45pm: Perhaps this is why Chard has such trouble recognising any novelty in this war. He can't even see it happening. Perhaps. But there are a lot of dangerous perhapses. Perhaps this is peace in our time. Perhaps they will not cut my head off if I smile at them. Perhaps I should put on the veil to keep the peace. Perhaps I should not publish that cartoon, that essay, stage that play, have that conference. Perhaps it's my fault that they can't take a joke. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps. All very dangerous perhapses. Not quite Doris Day, is it? In the 60s it was an exciting fissure to come across a Mediterranean, Italian, foreign chappie. It was all garlic, hairnets, strong coffee and Cinzano. Now, foreign means slaughtering a goat for Ramadan in the bathtub on the third floor, demanding veiling an cliteroctomy for women, and beheading for anyone who thinks ill of any of this- or the wafting smell of curry for breakfast, lunch and dinner, turbans and pajamas, if you are lucky. Australian customs, habits, traditions? Don't ever mention them coz you're a racist if you do.

Stroking our beards at Mrs Kornig’s fondue fundraiser for the Lutheran church is hardly an Australian tradition either, old chap, but don’t let me stop you. Live and let live, that’s my motto.

Back in the gold rush days, you people had your own camp, behind the Germans and in front of the Chinese. Multiculturalism, innit. Rich tapestry and all that.

We do, however, draw the line at people selling cheese laced with faeces. Most unhygenic, but if you wish to savour such delicacies from the old country, don’t let me stop you.

Soren wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 9:16pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 8:45pm: Perhaps this is why Chard has such trouble recognising any novelty in this war. He can't even see it happening. Perhaps. But there are a lot of dangerous perhapses. Perhaps this is peace in our time. Perhaps they will not cut my head off if I smile at them. Perhaps I should put on the veil to keep the peace. Perhaps I should not publish that cartoon, that essay, stage that play, have that conference. Perhaps it's my fault that they can't take a joke. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps. All very dangerous perhapses. Not quite Doris Day, is it? In the 60s it was an exciting fissure to come across a Mediterranean, Italian, foreign chappie. It was all garlic, hairnets, strong coffee and Cinzano. Now, foreign means slaughtering a goat for Ramadan in the bathtub on the third floor, demanding veiling an cliteroctomy for women, and beheading for anyone who thinks ill of any of this- or the wafting smell of curry for breakfast, lunch and dinner, turbans and pajamas, if you are lucky. Australian customs, habits, traditions? Don't ever mention them coz you're a racist if you do.

Stroking our beards at Mrs Kornig’s fondue fundraiser for the Lutheran church is hardly an Australian tradition either, old chap, but don’t let me stop you. Live and let live, that’s my motto.

Back in the gold rush days, you people had your own camp, behind the Germans and in front of the Chinese. Multiculturalism, innit. Rich tapestry and all that.

We do, however, draw the line at people selling cheese laced with faeces. Most unhygenic, but if you wish to savour such delicacies from the old country, don’t let me stop you.

Chard wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 4:49am:

freediver wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 8:45pm: Perhaps this is why Chard has such trouble recognising any novelty in this war. He can't even see it happening. Hey, when you're done slurping Soren's flaccid member

Fook off, I am not interested in cockfanciers, especially from Alabama. I hate Alabama cockfanciers. I can barely tolerate Paki Bvggers in cyberspace.

So,  as the Prophet (pbuh) says, no fooking cigar for you, infidel.
:D

freediver wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:20pm:

Chard wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 4:49am: freediver wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 8:45pm: Perhaps this is why Chard has such trouble recognising any novelty in this war. He can't even see it happening. Hey, when you're done slurping Soren's flaccid member could you be a pal and give specific examples of what exactly it is you think is new or novel already? You keep saying new an d novel bust you have yet to show anything that could be considered new and/or novel. Likewise, you are yet to come up with a previous war that compares. I am sure that whatever examples I give you will completely miss the point and give a 'counter-example' of a war that you place in the same category, yet was nothing at all like the current one.

I gave examples two pages back, you oblivious bastard. You still have not produced a single shred of exidence to back you claim that the GWOT and Al Qeuda represent a new or novel form of war. Worse, now you want me to prove that some that something doesn't exist does not in fact exist, which tells me you're uneducated dumbass that doesn't know that you can't prove a negative.

So seriously, quit dodge about like a dishonest asshole and show evidence for your claim already.

Soren wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:10pm:

Chard wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 4:49am: freediver wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 8:45pm: Perhaps this is why Chard has such trouble recognising any novelty in this war. He can't even see it happening. Hey, when you're done slurping Soren's flaccid member Fook off, I am not interested in cockfanciers, especially from Alabama. I hate Alabama cockfanciers. I can barely tolerate Paki Bvggers in cyberspace. So,  as the Prophetic (pbuh) says, no fooking cigar for you, infidel.

So not only are you racial and religious bigot, you're an open homophobe too. Color me unsurprised. There's good news though. Several papers published in Nature, the NEMJ, and the Lancet all indicate that those that dislike homosexuals have a very high likelihood of being gay themselves. So all you and Freediver need to do is claw your way past the leisure suits in that closet and you can both live happily ever after.

Chard wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 4:42am:

Soren wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 9:10pm: Chard wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 4:49am: freediver wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 8:45pm: Perhaps this is why Chard has such trouble recognising any novelty in this war. He can't even see it happening. Hey, when you're done slurping Soren's flaccid member Fook off, I am not interested in cockfanciers, especially from Alabama. I hate Alabama cockfanciers. I can barely tolerate Paki Bvggers in cyberspace. So,  as the Prophetic (pbuh) says, no fooking cigar for you, infidel. So not only are you racial and religious bigot, you're an open homophobe too. Color me unsurprised. There's good news though. Several papers published in Nature, the NEMJ, and the Lancet all indicate that those that dislike homosexuals have a very high likelihood of being gay themselves. So all you and Freediver need to do is claw your way past the leisure suits in that closet and you can both live happily ever after.

That is just sooo gay, man!

Soren wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 6:41am:

Chard wrote on Feb 21st, 2013 at 4:42am: Soren wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 9:10pm: Chard wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 4:49am: freediver wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 8:45pm: Perhaps this is why Chard has such trouble recognising any novelty in this war. He can't even see it happening. Hey, when you're done slurping Soren's flaccid member Fook off, I am not interested in cockfanciers, especially from Alabama. I hate Alabama cockfanciers. I can barely tolerate Paki Bvggers in cyberspace. So,  as the Prophetic (pbuh) says, no fooking cigar for you, infidel. So not only are you racial and religious bigot, you're an open homophobe too. Color me unsurprised. There's good news though. Several papers published in Nature, the NEMJ, and the Lancet all indicate that those that dislike homosexuals have a very high likelihood of being gay themselves. So all you and Freediver need to do is claw your way past the leisure suits in that closet and you can both live happily ever after. That is just sooo gay, man!

Seriously, even Elton John thinks you're more queer than football bat. Now, I'm not saying I'm  judging you for loving the cock. I'm just saying you really need to stop judging yourself.

Just saying...

lol trying to tar us with accusations of racism/homophobia/bigotry

mate we don't give a bugger about that on this forum it won't work here

this isnt your racial dystopia u.s society

JC Denton wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 7:54am:

lol trying to tar us with accusations of racism/homophobia/bigotry mate we don't give a bugger about that on this forum it won't work here this isnt your racial dystopia u.s society

"us"? I didnt see him talking to you? Certainly not "tarring" you. He was talking to soren and FD. You are paranoid. Did a shoe fit?

SOB

Not sure if he's being sarcastic or if Poe's Law has managed to finally reach saturation levels down there.

Quote:

I gave examples two pages back, you oblivious bastard.

Right. So Al QQuaida is nothing new because the ancient Romans dealt with insurgents?


Quote:

Worse, now you want me to prove that some that something doesn't exist does not in fact exist

I susggested you give an example of something you claim exists. Surely that is not too confusing for you.

Chard wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 11:49am:

Not sure if he's being sarcastic or if Poe's Law has managed to finally reach saturation levels down there.

You are from Alabama, pal - no ground for snottiness about colonials.

Chard wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 4:42am:

Soren wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 9:10pm: Chard wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 4:49am: freediver wrote on Feb 19th, 2013 at 8:45pm: Perhaps this is why Chard has such trouble recognising any novelty in this war. He can't even see it happening. Hey, when you're done slurping Soren's flaccid member Fook off, I am not interested in cockfanciers, especially from Alabama. I hate Alabama cockfanciers. I can barely tolerate Paki Bvggers in cyberspace. So,  as the Prophetic (pbuh) says, no fooking cigar for you, infidel. So not only are you racial and religious bigot, you're an open homophobe too. Color me unsurprised. There's good news though. Several papers published in Nature, the NEMJ, and the Lancet all indicate that those that dislike homosexuals have a very high likelihood of being gay themselves. So all you and Freediver need to do is claw your way past the leisure suits in that closet and you can both live happily ever after.

Actually, the old boy’s fond of a crinaline safari suit. He has a few in the wardrobe: pastel blue, olive and his favourite gray one with the big side pockets. The gray safari suit looks good with the black wig he wears on special occasions, like getting in some rough trade. It just covers the bald patch and the silver sideburns. It makes the old boy feel young again. Ah, to be back in the colonies. If only there were colonies to be back in!

Still, it helps to stay in style. The.old boy’s safari suits will always be in style, particularly when worn with the brown sandals he always wears - must remember to trim the toenails and get those varicose veins looked at. They can do wondrous things with lasers these days. The old boy’s rent boys are impeccably polite - they should be. They charge an arm and a leg. But one must look one’s best, no?

Still, with all the money he spends on prostitutes, you’d think the old boy could afford to replace the NHS spectacles. But no, he won’t hear of it. Besides, he only uses them to look at fine print. Bills, mainly. The old boy can see perfectly well - most days. Well, he does put them on to check out the goods when they strip down.Health reasons, you know.

"Hang on, lieben, let me look at you...Ah! You have a nasty rash, no? You try to kill me with that thing! You want to give me AIDS? You give me discount, no backchat."

Karnal, reread your post and imagine it's being voiced by Brian Blessed. Funny as all hell, right.

http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2013/05/cbs-news-blockbuster-u-s-special-forces-told-you-cant-go-to-benghazi-during-attacks-2635578.html

CBS News Blockbuster: U.S. Special Forces told “you can’t go” to Benghazi during attacks

Monday, May 6, 2013 12:35

By Susan Duclos

One news report after another is coming out into the massive Benghazi coverup perpetrated by people within the Obama administration as the congressional hearings are scheduled to start on Wednesday, May 8, 2013.

Earlier I wrote about the official Obama administration “Benghazi Talking Points” completely unraveling, with published copies of three different versions by The Weekly Standard and how even a Democratic Congressman acknowledged deliberate inaccurate reports coming from the Obama administration.

CBS News now releases a blockbuster report, showing that U.S. Special forces were told “you can’t go now, you don’t have the authority to go now,” causing them to miss a flight that could have saved the lives of the four Americans killed in Benghazi, Libya on 9/11/12.

The account from Gregory Hicks is in stark contrast to assertions
from the Obama administration, which insisted that nobody was ever told
to stand down and that all available resources were utilized. Hicks gave
private testimony to congressional investigators last month in advance
of his upcoming appearance at a congressional hearing Wednesday.

According
to excerpts released Monday, Hicks told investigators that SOCAFRICA
commander Lt. Col. Gibson and his team were on their way to board a
C-130 from Tripoli for Benghazi prior to an attack on a second U.S.
compound “when [Col. Gibson] got a phone call from SOCAFRICA which said,
‘you can’t go now, you don’t have the authority to go now.’ And so they
missed the flight … They were told not to board the flight, so they
missed it.”

No assistance arrived from the U.S. military
outside of Libya during the hours that Americans were under attack or
trapped inside compounds by hostile forces armed with rocket-propelled
grenades, mortars and AK-47 rifles.

The CBS News report also published excerpts from Hicks’ April interview with congressional investigators on the House Oversight Committee.

Read the whole report.

Due to the nature of the information finally being exposed about the events of September 11, 2012, before, during, and after the attack, and the Obama administration’s subsequent lies told to the American people, even left-wing news sites are headlining with things like “Vindicated: Charges Of A Benghazi Cover-Up No Longer ‘Fox-Induced Hysteria’.”

The emergence of a number of whistleblowers who have come forward to refute the claims made by some members of President Barack Obama’s
administration relating to the September 11, 2012, attack on an
American consulate in Benghazi does not directly implicate the White
House in a cover-up. They do, however, demolish the
politically-motivated allegations by a slew of commentators on the left
who asserted that those reporters doggedly investigating the American response
to the attack were onto something. Those left-of-center commentators
who dismissed the investigation into the Benghazi attack as a right-wing
delusion animated by a personal hatred of the president have never
looked more vacuous.



An interim report from the House investigation
into the administration’s response to Benghazi released in April is
particularly damning. The report found that the decision to withdraw
security assets from the region is likely to have come from the highest
levels of the State Department. The report also found State’s talking
points relating to the attack were altered to remove references to Al
Qaeda’s involvement. These edits are unlikely to have been made to
protect classified information, and may have been made to support the
White House’s election year claim that the terror group had been
effectively neutralized.

Some of the claims made by the Benghazi whistleblowers support the interim House report’s assertions.

The American Spectator addresses the initial investigation by the “Accountability Review Board,” and the witness testimony they never bothered investigating:

Also yesterday, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) said that the Obama
administration had literally threatened one or more of the Benghazi
whistleblowers and that hospital records had been tampered with to
conceal the identity of at least one of the survivors of the
attack.

So what is the Obama administration trying to hide? Pretty much
everything.

Last week, we learned that the State Department’s Inspector
General is investigating the Pickering-Mullen “Accountability
Review Board” for, among other things, its failure to investigate
and get statements from the Benghazi survivors. Before there were
whistleblowers there were survivors, yet the comprehensively
misnamed “Accountability Review Board” didn’t question them.

Which isn’t a surprise. The ARB did what it was paid to do:
limit the damage and blame people under Hillary Clinton for the
failures of leadership and management. It was, simply, a whitewash.
We’ll probably wait a long time for the IG to report the facts —
2017 sounds like the right time frame.

More from CNN’s Jake Tapper and Dana Bash:

Hicks said that four U.S. Special Forces troops in Tripoli, led by
Lieutenant Colonel Gibson, planned to hitch a ride on the Libyan plan to
travel to Benghazi to help.

“We fully intended for those guys to go, because we had already
essentially stripped ourselves of our security presence, or our security
capability to the bare minimum,” Hicks recalled.

But the four were informed by someone with United States Africa
Command – SOCAFRICA – that they didn’t have the authority to do so,
Hicks said.

“So Lieutenant Colonel Gibson, who is the SOCAFRICA commander, his
team, you know, they were on their way to the vehicles to go to the
airport to get on the C 130 when he got a phone call from SOCAFRICA
which said, ‘you can’t go now, you don’t have authority to go now,’”
Hicks said. “And so they missed the flight.”

“They were told not to board the flight, so they missed it,” Hicks
said. “I still remember Colonel Gibson, he said, ‘I have never been so
embarrassed in my life that a State Department officer has bigger balls
than somebody in the military.’ A nice compliment.”

There is no doubt that information will be coming out at a fast rate leading up to the hearings on May 8, 2013.

A couple of questions come to mind.

How soon before Obama throws former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton under the bus and how hard will the Clinton’s come out swinging once he has?

Recent related WuA posts

White House Benghazi Spin Completely Unravels Ahead Of May 8 Hearings

Names Of Benghazi ‘Whistle-blowers’ Revealed; Chaffetz – More Will Talk; WH Spin ‘Happened A Long Time Ago’

Report Embedded- Progress Report on Benghazi Terror Attack Investigation

Benghazi Review Panel Under Investigation By Inspector General

Benghazi Whistle-Blowers In State Department And CIA Threatened By Obama Administration

Why Is Obama Hiding The 9-11 Benghazi Survivors From Congress?

All Libya, 9-11 Attack WuA related posts found here.


http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2013/05/cbs-news-blockbuster-u-s-special-forces-told-you-cant-go-to-benghazi-during-attacks-2635578.html