WHY IS OBAMA ARMING OUR ENEMIES AND AT THE SAME TIME WAGING WAR ON AMERICANS AT HOME???

[Whirlaway]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclo..._World_History

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

got a link?

[i'va biggen]

Not one word there about Obama arming our enemies,but thanks for a link.

[BigLouie]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Repeat. Obama is arming our enemy, an enemy who killed thousands of Americans....Reagan did nothing of the sort.

Although you keep saying this you have yet in three pages of post to give a specific example of Obama arming our enemies other than saying he is.

[Yssup Rider]

Yeah, he quoted Wiki world history.

snick!

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

With the Benghazi official account breaking down like cheap cement with too much sand in the mix, we now know with near certainty that our very own Department of State has been recruiting and arming Al-Qaeda.

Let's reflect on autumn 2000. Al-Qaeda was officially designated by our President as global enemy Number One. In response to the events of September 11, 2000 and after designating an axis of evil yet carefully navigating around the question of Islam and its fanatics, the federal government in Washington rushed to increase surveillance and security measures to guard against Al-Qaeda and the threat of terrorism.

We, the citizens who are not responsible for terrorism, are saddled 12 years later with the Department of Homeland Security, the Transportation Safety Administration and a surveillance technology that is everywhere, all the time.
$9 trillion dollars later are we more secure? If Al-Qaeda is the prime designee in the axis of evil, why is the US Department of State recruiting and arming them? The implication is to topple the Ba'athist regime of Bashar Assad, but that brings up more questions. Disturbing questions. But let's stick with the topic of Who Are They Looking For?

TSA is omnipresent. Trains, planes and automobiles. Now railroads and buses. Next it will be dog walkers and model airplanes.

Homeland Security peers through every remote camera and surveillance platform. The federal decision to see and record everything is approaching total coverage. You're even recorded and surveilled in many national parks.
Who, or what, are they looking for? If Al-Qaeda is now our surrogate shadow-military so the US Department of State can pretend to clean hands, who is all this surveillance for? It looks like Washington has targeted you and me as the mission of surveillance. I mean, if the Al-Qaeda boogey-man is now inside the tent, who is Washington looking for?

Warrantless wiretapping. Police checkpoints. Metal detectors. Bomb scanners. Backscatter x-ray machines. Warrantless physical searches. Millions of scanning surveillance cameras. Everything you write, every commentary stored, many bone-deep Patriotic groups labeled by the Washington as potential terrorists, then Orwell was a lightweight in describing the total surveillance state and it was all brought to pass by the threat of Al-Qaeda.
But now the federal apparatus is recruiting and arming Al-Qaeda, the zenith of Islamic terror. We're still carrying the (often unconstitutional) weight of surveillance and security even as the threat has been brought into our national tent.

I'm sure to 100 decimal points there are threats out there. I am, after all, a firm defender of the 2nd Amendment. But this is the question; if Al-Qaeda was enemy number one and the US Government expensed trillions of dollars to forge a surveillance and security society responding to the threat of Al-Qaeda and Islamic jihadists, and we're now recruiting them and arming them ... who, or what, is all this surveillance looking for?

You? Me?


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/...#ixzz2HIjg7Rrj
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Hey dumb-asses!

Bill Clinton was President in Autumn, 2000.

The World Trade Towers were hit on Sept, 11, 2001

Whirly just captured Douche-Bag of the Decade with an impressive cast of also-rans.

My hose is out for you.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Hey dumb-asses!

Bill Clinton was President in Autumn, 2000.

The World Trade Towers were hit on Sept, 11, 2001

Whirly just captured Douche-Bag of the Decade with an impressive cast of also-rans.

My hose is out for you.

Hey Dumber Ass. No one said Bush said Al Qaeda was global enemy number one. Clinton said it in 2000, just like Whirly said.

YOU ARE AN IGNORANT MORON!!

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Hey Dumber Ass. No one said Bush said Al Qaeda was global enemy number one. Clinton said it in 2000, just like Whirly said.

YOU ARE AN IGNORANT MORON!!

Hey Dumbest Ass;

I said Clinton was President in Autumn, 2000.

He was,

You said "No one said Bush said Al Qaeda was global enemy number one."
Correct. I didn't say it either, asshole.

You also said "Clinton said it in 2000, just like Whirly said. "

Actually, he said via a "cut and paste" designated by our President as global enemy Number One.

He went on to say via cut and paste, "In response to the events of September 11, 2000"

After reading about that infamous day, Sept. 11, 2000, you might assume whirly knew who the President was in Autumn, 2000 but I won't.

After reading way too many of the 20,000 plus posts you 2 have between you, the only safe assumption is that you are both cocksuckers.

In a related story, for the first time, the judging panel has declared sog to be the co-winner of that Douche-bag of the Decade (Senior Div)award thing.

Thank you for opening your mouth.

You've been schooled, BITCH!

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Hey Dumbest Ass;

I said Clinton was President in Autumn, 2000.

He was,

You said "No one said Bush said Al Qaeda was global enemy number one."
Correct. I didn't say it either, asshole.

You also said "Clinton said it in 2000, just like Whirly said. "

Actually, he said via a "cut and paste" designated by our President as global enemy Number One.

He went on to say via cut and paste, "In response to the events of September 11, 2000"

After reading about that infamous day, Sept. 11, 2000, you might assume whirly knew who the President was in Autumn, 2000 but I won't.

After reading way too many of the 20,000 plus posts you 2 have between you, the only safe assumption is that you are both cocksuckers.

In a related story, for the first time, the judging panel has declared sog to be the co-winner of that Douche-Bag of the Decade (Senior Div)award thing.

Thank you for opening your mouth.

You've been schooled, BITCH!

Hey sog, Hey whirly


I'm gonna' bump this post

Every Fucking Day Untill I Get 20,000 Views.

You can make this easy,

But you can't make it hardsnick, snick


You WILL Kneel Before Zod!

[CuteOldGuy]

Geez, Münchausenman, you really get a little testy when you're proven wrong. Which is most of the time you post.

Chill out, dude!

[Chica Chaser]

I'm seriously leaning towards a new Sandbox rule. Anyone wanna guess what it might be?

[CuteOldGuy]

Sorry if I got out of hand, CC.

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Geez, Münchausenman, you really get a little testy when you're proven wrong. Which is most of the time you post.

Chill out, dude!

Hey dumbest ass,

How do I act when I'm wrong?

I use a concept that is completely foreign to you based on an action that means nothing to you.


I tell the truth and admit my error.


And I try to thank any of the little douche-bags, you know, the people so insignificant that being one of the prolific posters is all that keeps them from self-immolating with 4 gallons of Exxon Supreme.
Thank you sog. And if I'm ever wrong about some topic I'll let you know, Wrong as in factually wrong.
Not wrong as in your opinion I'm wrong

Level with me, have you ever sucked a bigger dick than mine?

[CuteOldGuy]

Well, Münchausenman, you just showed us all how you act when you're wrong. Thanks for the example. We'll know it, now, when we see it, which is usually whenever you post.

Thanks again! And, Have a Nice Day!

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Geez, Münchausenman, you really get a little testy when you're proven wrong. Which is most of the time you post.

Chill out, dude!

I'm starting to think MasterDickMuncher may have "issues."

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

I'm starting to think MasterDickMuncher may have "issues."

Ya think?