Terror threat: Senator cites increased 'chatter'

Sen. Saxby Chambliss said "the chatter" intercepted by U.S. intelligence agencies led the Obama administration to shutter 22 embassies and consulates and issue a global travel warning to Americans.
Associated Press
Aug 4, 2013


The weekend closure of almost two dozen U.S. diplomatic posts in the Muslim world resulted from the gravest terrorist threat seen in years, the top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee said Sunday.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss said "the chatter" intercepted by U.S. intelligence agencies led the Obama administration to shutter 22 embassies and consulates and issue a global travel warning to Americans.

"Chatter means conversation among terrorists about the planning that's going on — very reminiscent of what we saw pre-9/11," Chambliss, R-Ga., told NBC's "Meet the Press."

"This is the most serious threat that I've seen in the last several years," he said.

Rep. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told ABC's "This Week" that the threat intercepted from "high-level people in al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula" was about a "major attack."

Yemen is home to al-Qaida's most dangerous affiliate, blamed for several notable terrorist plots on the United States. They include the foiled Christmas Day 2009 effort to bomb an airliner over Detroit and the explosives-laden parcels intercepted the following year aboard cargo flights.

Rep. Pete King, who leads the House Homeland Security subcommittee on counterterrorism and intelligence, said the threat included dates but not locations of possible attacks.

"The threat was specific as to how enormous it was going to be and also that certain dates were given," King, R-N.Y., said on ABC.

Rep. Adam Schiff, a House Intelligence Committee member, said the "breadth" of the closures suggests U.S. authorities are concerned about a potential repeat of last year's riots and attacks at multiple embassies, including the deadly assault in Benghazi, Libya, where the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans were killed.

In addition, Interpol, the French-based international policy agency, has issued a global security alert in connection with suspected al-Qaida involvement in several recent prison escapes including those in Iraq, Libya and Pakistan.

Those prison breaks add to the concerns about an attack, said Schiff, D-Calif., also noting the approaching end of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.

"So you have a lot things coming together. ... But all of that would not be enough without having some particularly specific information," he said.

The Obama administration's decision to close the embassies and the lawmakers' general discussion about the threats come at a sensitive time as the government tries to defend recently disclosed surveillance programs that have stirred deep privacy concerns and raised the potential of the first serious retrenchment in terrorism-fighting efforts since Sept. 11.

The Senate Judiciary Committee chairman has scoffed at the assertion by the head of the National Security Agency that government methods used to collect telephone and email data have helped foil 54 terror plots.

Schiff said he has seen no evidence linking the latest warnings to that agency's collection of "vast amounts of domestic data."

Other lawmakers defended the administration's response and promoted the work of the NSA in unearthing the intelligence that lead to the security warnings.

"The bottom line is ... that the NSA's job is to do foreign intelligence," Ruppersburger said. "The whole purpose is to collect information to protect us."

Added King, a frequent critic of President Barack Obama: "Whether or not there was any controversy over the NSA at all, all these actions would have been taken."

On Friday the Obama administration announced the weekend closures and the State Department announced a global travel alert.

The warning urged American travelers to take extra precautions overseas, citing potential dangers involved with public transportation systems and other prime sites for tourists. It noted that previous terrorist attacks have centered on subway and rail networks as well as airplanes and boats. It suggested travelers sign up for State Department alerts and register with U.S. consulates in the countries they visit. The alert expires on Aug. 31.

The statement said that al-Qaida or its allies might target either U.S. government or private American interests.

The intelligence intercepts also prompted Britain, Germany and France to close their embassies in Yemen on Sunday and Monday. British authorities said some embassy staff in Yemen had been withdrawn "due to security concerns."

Canada also announced it was closing its embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh.



JudgeMeNot's picture

I guess al Qaida reads newspapers too. Could have sworn President Obama said al Qaida was on its way out. Is it safe to go to Krogers?


He said "on the run".

JudgeMeNot's picture

deerwacker please read:

Sept. 25, Obama spoke to the United Nations General Assembly and said, “Al Qaeda has been weakened, and Osama bin Laden is no more.”

The next day, campaigning in Bowling Green, Ohio, Obama again said, “al Qaeda is on the path to defeat.” That same day at Kent State University, Obama used the same line. Obama said the same thing on Sept. 27 in Virginia Beach, Va.

Obama went back to saying the terrorist organization was on the “path to defeat” on Sept. 30 in Las Vegas, Oct. 4 in Denver and Oct. 4 at the University of Wisconsin in Madison.

On Oct. 18 in Manchester, N.H., Obama returned to the “path to defeat” line, which he repeated Oct. 19 in Fairfax, Va.

Obama said Oct. 23 at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Fla., “al Qaeda’s core leadership has been decimated.” He repeated the same line at a campaign event in Delray Beach, Fla. that day.

That day in Dayton, Ohio, Obama said, “That’s why, working with Joe Biden and our national security team, we’ve been able to decimate al Qaeda.”

By Oct. 24, he returned to the dominant “path to defeat” theme, before going back to “decimated” the next day in Cleveland, where the president said, “I said we’d refocus on the terrorists who actually carried out the 9/11 attacks – and al Qaeda is decimated and Osama bin Laden is dead.”

Obama returned to Las Vegas to again say “al Qaeda is on the path to defeat.” He said the same thing Oct. 25 in Richmond, Va., again that day in Tampa and on Oct. 27 in Nashua, N.H.

When will liberals learn.... ah, never mind, dumb question.

The Big Dog's back

For you right wingnuts still crying about Benghazi, the President decides, based on credible info, to close embassies, and you pizz and moan about thst.

Darwin's choice

Kinda like closing the barn door after the cows are gone....

He's terrified of Benghazzi.
And it would be REALLY inconvient to have to explain ANOTHER dead State department employee....so don't act like Obama is a freaking hero for doing what he should done before!

And, now, all Obama has done is give them plenty of time to plan the next 9/11 attack. What he should do is grow a spine, and put a quick-reaction force near all the embassies, and kick the living chit out any attackers. But, that won't happen, he's afraid of upsetting his muslim brothers.


What he should do is grow a spine,
....................Darwin's Feces-You don't have a spine or a brain.

and put a quick-reaction force near all the embassies, and kick the living chit out any attackers.
.........................Why don't you join the Armed Forces and do something about it ?
Oh that's right , you're a gut-less coward behind a keyboard.

Darwin's choice

Ever the azzhat. Your mother is going to need to wash your mouth out with soap to get the Obama out of it. Keyboard commando you are....!


You are a coward with a big mouth

Darwin's choice

PMS 4shizzle? You have no clue, yet come here and shoot your big mouth off, acting tough. I've called you out on you suck azz love for Obama several times, and you resort to childish name calling. No surprise! As dimwitted as you are, I realize the incapacity of your brain to be cognitive of what I post here.


"I realize the incapacity of your brain to be cognitive of what I post here."
......I am "cognitive" and comprehend of what you post. And it reads that you are lazy and stupid.
Even Gardenman here can see it -- but he says it in a nicer way.
Sad that you can't see how are stupid and intellectually lazy you are.


I find it interesting you wish the President would grow a spine. As I remember this is the President who said he would get Ben Laden and when he did he would kill him.

As I remember GWB got us into Iraq which cost thousands of lives and billions of dollars but he could not find one.....alas just one WMD. Yet that was the whole purpose of geting us into Iraq. They had hundreds but GWB could not find even one. He probably still thinks today they are just not looking under the right sand pile. They are there somewhere in that country.

Then in that previous administration we had Chaney and there was a real threat to world peace if there ever was one.

You just want Obama to go in to I guess every US embassy in the world and kick all those attackers and then there will be I guess world peace and everyone will live in harmony again. You are disillusioned and thankfully Obama is the President and you are no where close to the button that could start a nuclear war.

Darwin's choice

Drowning in the kool-aid.....!
here's your president....
And, I guess if he would have done something at one embassy, Benghazi wouldn't be such a well know city....


Like it or not he is your President. It may not be your choice at the polls or who you might like in office but never the less he is in the job and has the responsibilities and powers that comes with it.

You know Darwin Choce I could well have said the same about GWB and 911 as why did he not know ahead and had as per your philosophy a mass of soldiers on every corner in NYC, overhead jets flying and ships in the harbor to shoot down any unfriendly aircraft. Theh had the attack been successful in 911 GWB could have nuked every unfriendly country in the world and sent all of the Muslim world ablaze. Yep somewhere in all that havoc we might have gotten or enemys but with it killed millions of innocent people. Alas our leaders regardless of party have common sense unlike a small portion of those who believe as you.

JudgeMeNot's picture

'nuked every unfriendly country in the world and sent all of the Muslim world ablaze'

would have worked for many of us.


Re: "Chaney (sp) and there was a real threat to world peace,"

Better check out Samantha Power, Pres. Obama's choice for UN Ambassador.

She urged military action in Libya.

There's an interventionist that ONLY a hawk would love.



That State Dept. employee is no more dead than all those soldiers that
were mislead to their death! Why no rant about that? That's right, your Lord and Master was in charge then!!!


Benghazi? nothing important, just four dead americans. what difference does it make?


mikeylikesit-You are a good Republican puppet.


im politically neutral, and we are all puppets, aren't we?..


There have to be laws - good laws.

Everybody can't run around and do whatever they want.

If you are "politically neutral" , why then are you banging the Republican's big Benghazi drum ?


"Everybody can't run around and do whatever they want." coming from you ? hilarious


"Everybody can't run around and do whatever they want." coming from you ? hilarious "

.....................??? Explain yourself.


So you know 4shizzle, most people who look at things logically don't apply a label like Republican or Democrat to themselves when deciding their views and opinions. Someone, much like me as well, who is politically neutral can share the views of both sides on many issues.

I agree with Democrats on many issues, like birth control (I think it's a personal issue between a patient and a doctor, and at most, the states should decide the laws on this, not the federal government), gay marriage (I totally agree that homosexuals should get the same benefits that heterosexuals have), but yet also agree with Republicans on many issues, like gun control (more background checks will never help with criminals, since they don't bother with those and go straight to the black market, where they can easily obtain weapons that a law-abiding citizen wouldn't be allowed), and immigration (it's not fair to all those immigrants that did things the legal way to be delayed even longer because of illegals sneaking into the country.)

However, neither party fully encompasses my values and beliefs. Both sides love welfare and warfare, despite the fact they'll tell you otherwise. I just wish more people were politically neutral, instead of frothing at the mouth with hate and vile words for those with a different set of beliefs.


"So you know 4shizzle, most people who look at things logically -"
....................Try looking at things realistically.

"-don't apply a label like Republican or Democrat to themselves when deciding their views and opinions. Someone, much like me as well, who is politically neutral can share the views of both sides on many issues."
......................I don't believe EVERYTHING that the Democratic party stands for and I can't think of ANYTHING from the Republican party to believe in.

What party do you vote for ?
Let me guess.
Republican ?


Technically I voted Republican, but I wrote in Dr. Ron Paul instead of picking between the lesser of two evils (Obama or Mccain, Obama or Romney). As for when I registered to vote, I declared myself as an Independent. Realistically, it was the wise thing to do. Since Dr. Paul won't be running next election, unless someone steps up with some really good ideas, I won't vote for either party. I'll admit though, I was pretty close to voting for Mike Gravel, but he didn't address some issues I considered extremely important.




Iraq, over 4000 dead and no WMD! WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?



Better talk to those "right wing nuts" over at CNN who are having a Benghazi special Tues. evening:


Looks like the Sock Puppet-in-Chief is covering for the CIA.

A video caused it right? :)


What the president said was just about an internet movie trailer when appearing on Letterman, is now a primetime special on CNN. Seems like more and more keeps coming out and coming faster... drip... drip... drip...

It took 2 years for watergate for it to come to a head... it is now been almost 11 months. drip... drip... drip... it is how dams burst... drip... drip... drip till the drips become a strteam drip... stream... drip


Any intelligent person knows that WMDs had nothing to do with Iraq. Bush and his staff were after something else, control of the Middle East. Oh, and Barack is just as much of a warmonger as Bush, he just does it with more subtlety. Most Republicans and Democrats are war-lovers.


yeah, true enough. I was no fan of bush either. all liars..


You know the leftist would be screaming "Benghazi" if they could find a way to spin it. So far all they know how to do is scream racism and prop up dead kids for to get agenda's passed.

Don S

Let's thank Snowden for this one !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Darwin's choice

Wonder what Obama has to say about this?
"I'll stand with my muslim brothers..."
From his book.


Hey NSA! These Muslims appear to be up to no good.


There is NO overseas terrorist threat. It's just their way to make the public accept the "need" for the NSA's snooping tactics we have all been reading about. (More countries have been destroyed by and from within itself compared to "outside" intervention/forces.) (History repeats itself many, many times over unless.... you are knowledgeable of it.)


"There is NO overseas terrorist threat. It's just their way to make the public accept the "need" for the NSA's snooping tactics we have all been reading about."
......................Pardon me but , how long were you in a coma ?


"Was The Al-Qaeda Terror Threat Used To 'Divert Attention' From NSA Uproar?"



Pres. Obama:

"al Qaeda is on the path to defeat and bin Laden is dead,” (Sept. 12, 2012)

"al Qaeda is on the path to defeat, and Osama bin Laden is dead.” (Sept. 17, 2012)

"We have gone after the terrorists who actually attacked us 9/11 and decimated al Qaeda.” (Sept. 18, 2012)

“We’ve decimated al Qaeda’s top leadership," (Sept. 20, 2012)

“al Qaeda is on the path to defeat.” (Sept. 21, 2012)

“al Qaeda is on the path to defeat.” (Sept. 26, 2012)

al Qaeda is on the path to defeat.” (Sept. 27, 2012)

“We said that we would go after al Qaeda, and they are on the run and bin Laden is dead” (Sept. 28, 2012)

“al Qaeda is on the run and Osama bin Laden is no more.” (Oct. 5, 2012)

“al Qaeda is on its heels and Osama bin Laden is no more.” (Oct. 9, 2012)

“al Qaeda is on its heels and Osama bin Laden is no more.” (Oct. 11, 2012)

“al Qaeda’s core leadership has been decimated.” (Oct. 23, 2012)

“…we’ve been able to decimate al Qaeda.” (Oct. 23, 2012)

“al Qaeda is decimated and Osama bin Laden is dead.” (Oct. 23, 2012)

"al Qaeda has been decimated, Osama bin Laden is dead.” (Nov. 1, 2012)

Is this guy a LIAR or just STUPID?



I'll take "Liar or Stupid" for $1,000, Alex. And the question is: What two words best describe the current President of the United States? (Too bad there aren't three words. I'd add "incompetent" just to ensure the description is truly complete.)

JudgeMeNot's picture

is "kool-aid" one word? or is it koolaid? or kool aid?

Obama keeps saying "he" has done all these wonderful things. The Obama voter believes ANYTHING this clown tells them.


We are showing the terrorist we can be intimidated..... the US and other countries as well. Instead of beefing up security when threatened, we run and hide like a big dog with its tail between it's legs, or confused like a deer in the headlights. The greatest military on earth could and should be allowed to stand strong by protecting our overseas facilities and citizens

The Big Dog's back

Right out of the right wingnut playbook. Fox noise this morning had every Repub talking head say the same thing, WORD FOR WORD.


I don't watch fox news so I'll just take ur word for it since you saw it, not me. Kinda surprised tho they would play on words referencing dogs and deer. I like Jon Stewart and listen to CSPAN while working

JudgeMeNot's picture

Poochy secretly watches FOX News.


I watch it too to see what kind of bullsh#t falls out of thier mouths then eventually fall out of yours.


Judge to defendant:

"You do realize that exposing the illegal things your government has been doing is illegal?"



Why is there always a war on here about the President? It is as bad as what is going on in Washington.....no wonder nothing is accomplished. No one works together, sour grapes achieve nothing. Four years of this gets us no where as a country and it never will. We all need to grow up and start cooperating with one another. Children act better than some of you do for crying out loud. Republican or Democrat, get your heads out of the places they are and start thinking of what you can do to make things better instead of worrying about your darn parties politics. If their is another terrorist problem then deal with it like MEN, not like school children. Stop squalking about who is in charge and start thinking about solutions.

Had edward snowden not done what he did, would we have this to worry about or did it help? I don't think it helped. I think it hurt, but that is just me. Yemen has ALWAYS been a problem as has Pakistan. Why do we continue to aide Pakistan financially ? Stop funding them and see what happens. Stop aiding Yeman as well.

Just two solutions that wouldn't do any harm in the war on terrrorism. Just a thought.


Common sense is not so common anymore, unfortunately. People would much rather point fingers and yell obscenities, than work together and compromise. There's a word you don't hear often in D.C., or on FOX or MSNBC, compromise.

One problem is that a lot of people seem to think they're 'special', and that their view is the only one that matters; hence why they can't listen to what someone else says, and actually look at it from their point of view. Many people are close-minded about their beliefs, and that's a huge roadblock on the road to a better tomorrow.


Sorry, but my criticism has nothing to do with "sour grapes" and everything to do with the fact that, more often than not, the Obama administration does exactly the WRONG thing. And no, I will NOT cooperate with the systematic dismantling of liberty.

That being said, you're 100% right on one count, and that involves foreign aid. Unfortunately, both Republicans AND Democrats seem to be of the opinion that we can buy influence (which might actually be true), buy respect (which ISN'T true), and buy love (only if you're an older man and the person giving the love is a gold digger).


And this is the problem with a lot of people. Collectivism. Blaming an entire group of people for the actions of a few. Bush Jr. was dismantling liberty long before Obama got into office. Let's not forget that Bush helped get the Patriot Act passed due to a national tragedy, even though it had been denied several times before 9/11. Did I ever once blame all Republicans? No. Did Obama repeal the Act like he said he would? No. Seems to me that Obama and Bush are working together wonderfully, while the rest of us bicker and point fingers. You're HIGHLY mistaken if you think that the head Republicans are any different than the head Democrats. Two peas in the same pod.

The Big Dog's back

Seeing how the right wing Repubs are 24 hour hate Obama, you tell me how to get along with people like that.


Exactly !

The Republicans hated him BEFORE he was inaugurated the first time.


Some/many people hated his policies that he pushed before he was elected. But then you steadfastly won't even believe that can be possible. It HAS to be because of his race. Then he went and pushed through a policy like Obamacare which was stopped 3 or 4 times before it was finally passed on a partyline vote, written behind closed doors, with only democrats inside, without time for ANYONE to read the bill, without any amendments allowed to be even heard, let alone voted on, just before the dems lost their super majority in the senate.

You reap what you sow. "Elections have consequences" was what Obama said after he was elected the first time... you reap what you sow. You want your way or the highway... you get that same thing in your face when you lost the votes to do as you please. You reap what you sow.


If he was a black Republican, he'd be loved by the Republicans.

JudgeMeNot's picture

Nope. McCain still would have won the nomination.


I'd bet you that McCain would have lost to Colin Powell if Colin had run for president .


You're on. Now prove it. ROFLMFAO. Then show us how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.


Re: "if Colin had run for president,"

And if frogs had wings, they wouldn't bump their butts on the ground when they hopped.

Primaries are beauty contests and have little to anything to do about competency or character. It's about the BUCKS.

Look: The Dems selected a "pretty boy," no-name, do-nothing as their candidate in '08 and some lefty bozos want a political do-nothing, has-been in '16.


Get over your "man crush" on Clinton - sadly, he's not going to call you.

The Big Dog's back

You're right 4shizzle.


Much like how the left wing Dems were hating on Bush for 24 hours a day? This is what I mean, blinded by hate. I seem to recall the Dems drawing Hitler staches on Bush, long before the Repubs did it to Obama. Both of which were completely lacking in taste.


I remember the intense hatred of Clinton by the Republicans .

And Fox News kept hating him even after he left office.


There's been hatred on both sides for a long time in politics. This started LONG before Clinton or the Bushes. I seem to recall something about Andrew Jackson's (?) campaign for election being especially vicious. If you can't defeat a man's ideas, then attacking everything else about him seems to be the philosophy of a lot of people in each political party.


People weren't " blinded by hate." There were legitimate reasons that Bush was hated. He "earned" it.

JudgeMeNot's picture

Same as Clinton, he earned it.


Did Clinton start a phony war where thousands of Americans died?


Re: "Did Clinton start a phony war"

The Serbian Conflict.

He's just "lucky" that there were no American casualties; just some innocent Chinese.


You'll love Samantha Power. She believes in U.S. military intervention in cases of genocide.

She was in favor of Obama's "phony" Libyan War.


Contango , get over your man crush on Clinton.


Bin Laden attacked the US because Clinton tried to kill him with a cruise misile a few times, Facts or rational thinking just is not your thing.



Your words are pretty much spot-on with my beliefs. And I, too, wrote in Ron Paul's name when it came time to vote for a President in the last election, even though I knew my vote would be symbolic only.

I've heard it oft stated the people that SHOULD run for office are smart enough NOT to.

I've written it time and again: our federally-elected officials have zero accountability. Whereas I have no doubt we do elect some good people, unfortunately they're not the ones in positions of power like Obama, Boehner, McConnell, Pelosi, Ryan and Reid, to name a few. And again, we keep electing the same "leaders" over and over and over again.

The GOP wants to make the rest of Obama's 2nd term utterly and totally miserable, and the Democrats want to block or go around every GOP proposal. Both major party "leaders" are like two little kids screaming, "Am not!", "Are too!" at each other. Our federally elected officials don't represent "We the People" anymore. They represent the folks stuffing the big bills in their campaign chests. Yes indeed . . . we have the best politicians money can buy.

And Benghazi? I truly do not believe the GOP gives a rats rump about getting "all the facts out". My bet is this is pure politics, where the GOP simply wants to use Benghazi as leverage to prevent Hillary Clinton from running in 2016. If Hillary would call up GOP Party Leaders today and say, "Call off your attack dogs and I promise *NOT* to run in 2016", the GOP would back away like somebody walking backwards after seeing a skunk while hiking out in the woods.

But back to our federally-elected officials...we really do need some way to hold them accountable. Ala the #1 Rule of Economics, namely "Incentives Matter", we need to find a way to both incentivize good legislative behavior and severely punish bad legislative behavior. But until we can figure out a way to both incentivize and punish, we'll continue to be frustrated with the likes of our current record-setting "Do Nothing" Congress, where GOP House sponsored bills as well as Senate sponsored bills are known to be 99.99% DOA when they pass from one entity to the next, but the Legislators go through the motions anyway thinking "We The People" can be so easily manipulated into thinking real work is being done.

Enough truly is enough. We desperately need elected officials who do the right things rather than the easy things, thereby truly representing *ALL* of their constituency instead of just those with all the cash.


"And Benghazi? I truly do not believe the GOP gives a rats rump about getting "all the facts out". My bet is this is pure politics, where the GOP simply wants to use Benghazi as leverage to prevent Hillary Clinton from running in 2016."
...............Yep, I agree. The GOP knows that Hillary would win and that's why also the GOP is messing with votes and voter rights.
The Repubs are staging a big kabuki show with lots of smoke and the hate filled , simple minds are buying it.
Again, the real motive of all this Bengahzi crap is to neutralize Hillary Clinton.

JudgeMeNot's picture

The American people will never give Billary the opportunity to fail again. Billary does have nothing to lose though, except for some weight.


"The American people will never give Billary the opportunity to fail again"
..............Nah, I don't believe that. That's your Republican Kool-Aid kickin' in.


4S, I don't know I can agree with your assertion of "The GOP knows that Hillary would win...". I believe they are most certainly worried she is the potentially strongest Democratic candidate and therefore are doing everything possible to keep her from running.

What neither major party seems to take as serious is if there is a really strong "other" candidate who runs . . . someone not registered in either major party . . . "We the People" might just choose the who's behind door #3. Or maybe I'm just day-dreaming again . . .


Yes, it was a bold assertion but I know one thing-- the Republicans knees are knocking at the thought of Hillary.


Still, Hillary is no better than Bush or Obama. She's been in the system far too long, and has become a part of it. Not to say she couldn't be a wonderful president, I just slightly doubt it due to her background.


Well,... that's your opinion.


Re: "GOP simply wants to use Benghazi as leverage to prevent Hillary Clinton from running in 2016."

Pure political clap trap. Who gives a sh*t how it will affect a has-been politico?

Benghazi is the tip o' the iceberg.

We Independents want to know what the (bleep) our govt. (CIA) is doing around the world.

According to CNN, the suspicion is that the CIA was/is running weapons to Syrian rebels.

Did Congress APPROVE getting us involved in another (bleeping) war?

It's the Endless War of the military industrial complex and it's been goin' on for 70 yrs.


Too bad that the Democrats don't have politicos with any guts and ethics anymore like Frank Church.


I agree with you OSUBuckeye, completely. Sadly, it is true that the people that should run for office, rarely ever do so, because they're smart enough to know that what it takes to make it in the world of politics today is pandering to your voters, and disagreeing with everything people from the other party say or do. It's no longer about giving the people's voice power, it's about keeping that power to themselves, and increasing it in every way possible.


No doubt Clinton comes with a checkered past and would hamper her effectiveness especially in the current political climate where character assassination is a sport. I just keep hoping one of the parties comes up with a strong candidate who isn't far left nor far right on any issue. It would be a welcome change to vote for who is the very best instead of the least worse


As long as we are "wishing" I would wouldn't necessarily mind a candidate with a VERY few strongly held winger issues as long as they were tempered with a few issues that were from the opposite "side's" preference. That would, hopefully break the wingers from both, or either, party. Most non kool aide drinkers have views from across the board, in real life. I know few Repubes who are wacco against gay rights, nor Dims who are wacco about having to have abortions after 20 weeks. But both sides are portrayed, by the media as zealots.In the real world folks are less divided. But most, if not all (national) politicians are driven by the wingers in their parties.


"the WSJ reports that the FBI 'has discovered vulnerabilities in the government's system for preventing market-moving economic reports from leaking to traders before public release.'"


And so Pres. Obama and his merry band of incompetents are pillaring Snowden while they can't even keep their own fly zipped?

JudgeMeNot's picture

Democrats have a hard time keeping the fly zipped. Clinton, Weiner...
Wonder if Huma will have that pen!s tattoo removed now?

The Big Dog's back

Larry craig, Gov sanford, mark foley, newt gingrich, john mcCain.


Large terror threat, embassies closed, overseas Americans warned, drone strikes and American evacuation of Yemen - and the Sock Puppet-in-Chief is "officially" telling us what???

He enjoyed parading out when bin Laden was killed, but now "Dear Leader" is MIA.

The CIA probably told him not to say anything.

Ya think that maybe that it was another anti-Mohammed video that p*ssed 'em off?

The Big Dog's back

The Benghazi thing is going nowhere. Guess again pooh.


Re: "The Benghazi thing is going nowhere."

Pres. Obama is going on "Leno" to tell us about the latest terrorist threat?

Only total brain-dead Obama-holes are still supporting this CIA puppet.

Bend over, grab your cheeks and spread your heinie wide poochie. Remember to smile.



Contango is getting nuttier.


"U.S. Files First Criminal Charges In Benghazi Attack: Reports"


Thought that it was a "fake scandal?"

"What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?"

- Secy. of State, Clinton.

WOW! I'll bet that AG Holder woulda filed some REAL heavy charges against members of al-Qaeda if 9/11 had happened on Pres. Obama's watch!!!


This comment thread seems heavily focused on the liberal vs. conservative Democrat vs. Republican topic.

In reality it has nothing to do with that. Obama = Bush - Clinton = Reagan etc....

What it's really about is our federal government being a giant sock puppet for corporate war and global hegemony. The U.S. government alphabet agencies do not release info about so called terrorists and tracking them unless they absolutely want us to know. There is no reason why the government needed to even bother telling us they were going to close embassies. Who cares? Let the bureaucrats have a day off, it's summer ya know.

What's more important is to really pay attention to what they say and do. JudgeMeNot pays attention and pointed out all the doublespeak of the president and his sycophants. It goes on around us all day, everyday 24/7/365. All you have to do is turn on the TeeVee and your bombarded with their propaganda. It matters not what party affiliation the person talking has, they are all working the same. Problem is they mask it all quite cleverly with Dem vs. Repub. Liberal vs. Conservative.

Wake up people, set aside the parties and lib vs. cons, that is sooooooo not important! Just look at the big picture of what goes on year after year after year.

The U.S. spends billions more than ANY other country on the planet for it's War Department. Notice, I didn't use defense dept., which is because it's no longer about "defense" it's now about planning, seeking and engaging in war.

Our country has more military bases spread all over the world than any other country.

The USA is involved with more military conflicts than any other nation on this planet.

The U.S. government spends billions and billions on military toys for killing.

Is all that necessary?

AND.....now (like they weren't before 911) they openly are supporting Al CIAda! Oops...I meant al Qeada....

Yeah, that's right people, do some research and find out who these "rebels" in Syria really are. Do more research pre-9/11 and find out how "the base" was actually created and which global power supported them.

The "enemy" is now our "friend" and vice versa. It's 1984 doublespeak but you all are so wrapped up in Democrat vs. Republican you aren't seeing this .


You make strong points except I can't dismiss the liberal vs conservative battle. The liberal agenda has built up a lot of momentum as people struggle more everyday. It is a road to socialism and if it starts taking hold, it'll be hard to stop.
The more noise liberals make, the harder the conservatives will fight back. Unfortunately the conservative mouth pieces come in the form of folks like Sean hannity, rush, Ann coultier, and so on. Their message would be a lot more valuable if they dropped the hi-test emotional rhetoric


Re: "What it's really about is our federal government being a giant sock puppet for corporate war and global hegemony."

Good post.

They are inseparable - fascism/corporatism.

The Iron Triangle: