This is Macgupta123's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Macgupta123's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
Why does it matter whether it is one intelligence agency or 17? Should the Office of Naval Intelligence have to concur with a finding of Russian interference in an election for the finding to be credible?
I recall how Obama was excoriated by the right-wing for studiously avoiding saying "radical Islamic terrorism". Trump's speech: " Per the Atlantic, "In an address full of religious references, the American president avoided the phrase "radical Islamic terrorism."
The Clintons and the Clinton Foundation were pilloried, probably rightly, for this kind of thing: favorable foreign policy and support for charitable foundation tied together. "The World Bank plans to announce Sunday at an event with Ivanka Trump, the U.S. president’s daughter and senior White House adviser, that Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates have pledged $100 million collectively toward a fund for women who own or want to start businesses, according to people familiar with the announcement."
Paraphrase of Senator Lindsey Graham from around 2006 is "I don't want her to be President, but she's a good Senator". Also, what he wrote in the 2006 Time Magazine:,28804,1975813_1975846_1976531,00.html Quote: "In the Senate, a small body of big egos, Senator Clinton, 58, is sought out by her colleagues to form legislative partnerships. Her high-profile status, combined with a reputation as a smart, prepared, serious Senator, creates real influence. In a short time, this blue-state Senator with a blue-state perspective has managed to build unusual political alliances on a variety of issues with Republicans Bill Frist, Sam Brownback, Elizabeth Dole, Rick Santorum and other conservatives. As a red-state conservative, I have found common ground with her on improving health-care benefits for members of the National Guard and Reserve. We also created a bipartisan Manufacturing Caucus to help promote and address the problems facing America's manufacturers."
Having the facts correctly stated, lets now go into their interpretation. This is a good start: Quote: "Effectiveness can be a behind-the-scenes role, adding a serious amendment, working inside to get the language exactly right. By any reasonable standard, including the private comments of her colleagues on both sides of the aisle when she was in the Senate, she was very effective."
Your information is in need of an update: this page is that of the US government: Clinton sponsored 713 pieces of legislation and cosponsored 2,676, per this page. The final status of all this legislation was: Introduced [2,366] Committee Consideration [429] Floor Consideration [544] Failed One Chamber [4] Passed One Chamber [491] Passed Both Chambers [85] Resolving Differences [21] To President [78] Veto Actions [1] Became Law [77]
Is Erick Erickson one of the Washington elite? "What sets this story apart for me, at least, is that I know one of the sources. And the source is solidly supportive of President Trump, or at least has been and was during Campaign 2016. But the President will not take any internal criticism, no matter how politely it is given. He does not want advice, cannot be corrected, and is too insecure to see any constructive feedback as anything other than an attack." ... " I am told that what the President did is actually far worse than what is being reported. The President does not seem to realize or appreciate that his bragging can undermine relationships with our allies and with human intelligence sources. He also does not seem to appreciate that his loose lips can get valuable assets in the field killed. You can call these sources disloyal, traitors, or whatever you want. But please ask yourself a question — if the President, through inexperience and ignorance, is jeopardizing our national security and will not take advice or corrective action, what other means are available to get the President to listen and recognize the error of his ways? This is a real problem and I treat this story very seriously because I know just how credible, competent, and serious — as well as seriously pro-Trump, at least one of the sources is."
The fact is that Trump created his own troubles. After his surrogates said that Comey was fired at the recommendation of the Justice Department, Trump went ahead and said he was going to fire Comey any way regardless of the recommendations; and because Comey was not shutting down the Russia investigation.
... Trump has full authority to declassify and classify information Yes, no one is saying Trump did something illegal. But - if the information was received via some agreement with a foreign agency, then to unilaterally declassify it is to break that agreement.
Rather impatient, aren't we? Benghazi-gate - 5 years and counting - still nothing. Blancs 6.35%, Nuls 2.21% of the 47,568,588 Inscrits. Macron got 43.63% of the Inscrits. Le Pen got 22.38% of the Inscrits.
FYI, Quote: The founder of modern France “designed the Fifth Republic as a hybrid regime, combining the institutions of a parliamentary system with a powerful presidential office so that a crisis in the party system might not necessarily provoke a crisis of government,” Manent notes. Macron’s presidency will “be a true test of the Fifth Republic as De Gaulle envisioned it,” she added. “So far, this has never really been tested, because the system developed into a de facto two party system.” “It may have taken 60 years,” Manent writes, “but De Gaulle’s vision of the Fifth Republic could well be coming to a point of crisis.”
Pardon me, but aren't both Trump and Clinton WASP?
I think Obama's initial response was in line with that of most American Presidents (e.g., invade Granada, invade Iraq, invade Panama, etc.). People generally behave per the norms of the society they are in; and Democrats, and a black Democrat in particular are vulnerable to the charge of being weak, of being unwilling to use force. To Obama's credit, he listened to the evidence and to the generals, and maybe to his better self, and did not go to war. I don't think he went to the dark side; he escaped the perpetual dark side that is American foreign policy.
Highlander, Indian Air Traffic Control (ATC) has said it doesn't raise an alarm as long as it can match planes to filed flight plans. So, suppose a flight plan was filed for a plane from Kuala Lumpur to Kazakhstan, but no plane actually took off from Kuala Lumpur. The Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 did its turn, and somewhere over the Bay of Bengal, morphed into this flight, setting the right transponder codes as assigned in the flight plan (or however it is done) and interacting normally with ATC. For this to work, there might have to be some dead zone between hand-off from one ATC to the next? Is there such over the Bay of Bengal? Basic question is - is such a plot workable? Are there too many data trackers that would notice a plane did not exist on the initial leg of its flight, but appeared later? Thanks!
The world's first "hack-jacking"? (not my term).
If it was the pilot or co-pilot who diverted the flight from its path, then there isn't much I can think of that explains the subsequent events. If the hijacker was suicidal, why the turn-off of ACAR, transponder and long flight to oblivion to the South Indian Ocean? Agreed, we can never explain the actions of a crazy person. And apparently to disable ACAR the person would have to leave the cockpit- when exactly did that happen? If it is not the pilot and co-pilot: The plane was diverted from scheduled flight plan between the hand-off from the Malaysian air-control to Vietnam, the plane climbed high (to the impossible 45000 feet? or to its rated ceiling) probably to disable or kill the 239 passengers, made its way across southern Thailand to the Strait of Malacca. Then what? Why would it turn south to seemingly nowhere? (Bloomberg just reported that the most likely area for the plane is 1000 miles to the west of Perth, Australia). If the plane headed south, the motive has to be that the perpetrators don't want the plane to be found or even if located, not to be recoverable. Not the passengers as hostages, not the plane, not its cargo - none of these hold value to the perpetrators. Could the plane have been put on autopilot and the perpetrators safely bailed out? Or were they willing to commit suicide in that cause? Why might it be so vital to the perps. that the plane not be recovered? The only reason I can think of that they didn't want anyone to discover how they did what they did. Which leads to the thought that this was a dry run for something bigger. The shoe bomb, the underwear bomb, the liquid bomb - all failed in the first attempt, and all attracted immediate security counter-measures. Yes, it sounds stupid.....But why are they insisting the plane headed south towards the deep ocean? If the plane headed north, there are more plausible scenarios.
Q: Might China have a hole in its radar coverage over the China-Burma border? Could the plane have turned away from its Andaman heading and flown over Burma, and over the Myanmar-China border. I imagine the Tibet border with India is well-covered with radar but maybe not the interior of Tibet? Subsequently the plane flew over Tibet towards Xinjiang? Is this even remotely feasible? The problem with the plane landing in Myanmar is that we have a 7-hour flight to account for (unless the engines were kept running on the ground).
If INMARSAT, a British company, had information that ACARs was turned off around the time the plane's transponder turned off, but that the plane was pinging the satellite for 7 hours after take-off, why was that information kept secret for so long? Even if INMARSAT could not estimate the position of the aircraft, the fact that the airplane was alive 7 hours after take-off would immediately focus the search away from the Gulf of Thailand. Why would the governments involved permit the search of the Gulf of Thailand to continue for so many days? The only reason I can think of is, not that any vital military or technological "spy" secrets would be revealed as some say, but that deception of the hijackers was for some reason crucial. I think search-and-rescue/recovery is expensive and accident-prone. I don't think hours of monotonous scanning of the sea promotes alertness or safety. One does it because one has to, not otherwise. That information about the extended life/flight of the plane is being made public only seven-eight days after the plane "disappeared" can charitably be attributed to the necessity of deception to thwart the hijacking adversary; every other reason I can think of demonstrates malafides on the part of the Chinese, Malaysian, British, American governments. Then the question is - what was going on that deception was so necessary?
Highlander, Would there be a problem getting the aviation GPS unit on-board?
Someone posted this image from showing the airplane's path per the latest Reuters scoop:
Highlander, what to make of this Reuters report? "In a far more detailed description of the military radar plotting than has been publicly revealed, the first two sources said the last confirmed position of MH370 was at 35,000 feet about 90 miles off the east coast of Malaysia, heading towards Vietnam, near a navigational waypoint called "Igari". The time was 1:21 a.m.. The military track suggests it then turned sharply westwards, heading towards a waypoint called "Vampi", northeast of Indonesia's Aceh province and a navigational point used for planes following route N571 to the Middle East. From there, the plot indicates the plane flew towards a waypoint called "Gival", south of the Thai island of Phuket, and was last plotted heading northwest towards another waypoint called "Igrex", on route P628 that would take it over the Andaman Islands and which carriers use to fly towards Europe. The time was then 2:15 a.m. That is the same time given by the air force chief on Wednesday, who gave no information on that plane's possible direction."
Suppose the plane was hijacked. a. If it was hijacked for the usual hostage scenario, we have to assume that it failed for some reason and the plane crashed. Why the wreckage hasn't been found may be because people were looking in the wrong area. b. But if it was hijacked by any kind of terrorist or criminal group, wouldn't there be chatter when the plot failed? c. If the plane was hijacked in order to have a plane, (a) is there a less onerous way to get a plane? (b) for what purpose? Suppose the plane landed somewhere, deplaned the passengers, etc., refueled and continued on far away from the Gulf of Thailand, Malacca Strait, Indian Ocean. What can one do with a Boeing 777-200? Is there some way of sneaking it up to a target to crash into without anyone suspecting? E.g., if there is a scheduled airline flight X from A to B, is there someway for a terrorist to use that fact to bring this hijacked plane masquerading as X close enough to B for it to be too late for anyone to do anything before it is realized B is an imposter? d. Was this a dry run for a bigger operation?
Aren't there possible large scale political effects of increasing inequality? Namely when a people lose hope of improving their lot over their lifetime and for their children, they may become revolutionary? E.g., someone pointed out to me that in Egypt, the average lot of people was improving under Hosni Mubarak. Looking at gross averages like the Human Development Index, Egyptians were better off than they'd ever been. And wondered why the Egyptians revolted. But even a cursory look under those averages shows a story of chronic unemployment/underemployment and increasing poverty.
1 reply
Thank you for making the demand!
Toggle Commented Oct 1, 2013 on VIPS demand for evidence at Sic Semper Tyrannis