Originally Posted By: craigd
Originally Posted By: L. Brown
...."intel" doesn't get us into anything. The Director of National Intelligence and the Directors of the CIA, NSA, DIA, Homeland Security, FBI etc do not make policy. (All they do is provide information to policymakers.) That's the President's job....

....Are we "supposed to use the phrase 'Islamist terrorist'"? I do, Craig--because I find it to be quite accurate. I see no reason not to use it. How about you?

You have sources on hundreds of millions of dollars supporting Islamist terrorism coming from American Muslims, Craig? I'd be interested in seeing those. You do know that supporting terrorism is a crime, right? And there are people who have been charged and convicted of doing so. Currently serving prison sentences....

....So no apology for misquoting me on ducks? You're a stand-up guy, Craig.

You can liken 'intel' folks to the granny with her rosary beads or kindergarteners actually learning something at school. The kids and granny are paying for the handful of pedophiles and their co-conspirators. Catholic financial statements are public record, there is income and there're payouts. Payouts for the transgressions of a few are on the increase and education budgets are being trimmed. Wouldn't it follow that 'intel' should pay their fair share?

As to the use of phrases, the top fellow's 'job' has been to direct that long alphabet list you mentioned on the ways of pc. Maybe, you have the luxury of retirement to be able to speak with accuracy, sometimes?

I honestly don't think you're interested in 'seeing' what you'd rather not. Aren't you the fellow that said google was your friend? For grins, less than a week ago, a large chic. newspaper reported that this admin hasn't charged or prosecuted terror fundraisers thinly veiled as charities in the US since Feb. of '09. Are you sure it's a crime if policy is selective prosecution?

Back to the ducks eh Larry. Please don't stoop to personal attacks. You've hurt my feelings. Luckily since lead shot has been banned, I can feel like a duck with water running off my back. I won't try to contradict settled science, quotes might only be confused with intolerance, hate talk and the current revised stance that lead might come from elsewhere.


Craig, I'm confused by your first para. Please explain. What should "intel" pay for? And why should they pay?

Re Islamist terrorism, refer to your copy of the 9/11 Report, pp 361-363. Section entitled "Defining the Threat". "Thus our strategy must match our means to two ends: dismantling the al Qaeda network and prevailing in the longer term over the ideology that gives rise to ISLAMIST TERRORISM." (Emphasis mine.) Right there, in an official government publication. It's unfortunate that some of our current political leaders won't use that phrase. But the business of intelligence is to call a spade a spade, regardless of what politicians do. Speak truth to power. If you can't do that, you don't belong in the intelligence business. And I was in it for a long time. Politicians come and go. The Intelligence Community, like the military, is a permanent fixture.

Re support to terrorism, go to www.lawandsecurity.org. Check out their Terrorist Trial Report Card. They state that as of 2011, charges for material support to terrorism (which includes financial support) were on the rise. But depending on how terms are defined, the legal stuff can get pretty complex. However, from the report to which I refer, it doesn't sound like the material support charges immediately came to a halt after Obama took office. I like to blame him too . . . but preferably when he really does something bad. And there are plenty of those instances.

Re ducks . . . Craig, you're violating the rules. Again. "Revised stance that lead might come from elsewhere." BS. Where did I ever say that lead could only come from a single source, that single source being from bullets and/or shot? Quote please . . . if you can find one. The RAPTOR REHABILITATORS are focusing on fragments from bullets as being the source of lead poisoning in some eagles they've examined. But I'm sure even they are quite aware that there are more potential sources for lead than bullets. That's why it would be good to see some solid research on those sick and dead eagles to nail down the sources of the lead in question.

Last edited by L. Brown; 05/19/16 06:57 AM.