Do you think Al Qaida exists? If so, are they hostile to us? What is your proof?
Do you think UFOs exist? Are they hostile? What is your proof?
I haven’t unequivocally said this is true. I’ve said there is reason to think these government believe there really is a threat, and I’ve said the arguments to the contrary are very bad, which they are.
Terrorist activity in Yemen isn’t exactly an extraordinary claim either.
These governments thought Iraq had WMDs in 2003 as well. Or said they did.
I find the blind faith in this instance quite remarkable when no doubt compared to what people with the blind faith thought in 2003 about claims made then.
It’s realistic to build to the need. It’s unrealistic to take off a couple of days and expect that to mitigate a threat.
Some of the things the government has said, in the past, have turned out to be true.
None of the things UFO believers have said has ever turned out to be true.
Judging results by past performance is not “blind faith.”
Sometimes governments lie. Sometimes governments tell the truth. Truth is more common than many seem to believe, simply because lies are so easily detected these days. (Google Edward Snowden or Julian Assange if that point is unclear.)
To make distrust the default response to government warnings is much too cynical.
I’ve underlined the phrase I wanted to ask about. Too late for what? Too late for effective security measures because Obama’s opponents chose to sacrifice national security on the altar of political profit? Or too late to salvage American democracy because national leadership is held hostage by evil liars?
If the latter is your concern, I recommend better-informed target selection.
I wish people would stop referring to their government as “we.”
Yes, and they also thought Osama bin Laden was in that house in Abbotabad. We know they’re wrong sometimes and right other times.
This isn’t blind faith, though. I haven’t just taken their word; I’ve discussed why their actions support the general claim.
You weren’t talking about “build[ing] to the need”, you were talking about RE-building to a changing need. And a need identified only days ago, at that.
It’s still as ridiculous now as when you first proposed it.
And I know the “Everything government does is incompetent, stupid and wasteful, and whatever ‘reasons’ it offers are certainly only excuses and cover-ups” crowd is in full throat here. Is that because those nearly-divine government entities, the military, the police, and fire fighters, are not directly involved in the decision to close the embassies? They always seem to be exempt from the blanket assignment of incompetence to government employees. C’mon, is it really believed these come from a separate gene pool from all other government workers?
As for “take off a couple of days” being the only action taken, again, c’mon. This only makes sense if one has completely and totally swallowed the premise above. We can all see security officials in Washington and around the world sitting back in their overstuffed office chairs, cashing their lavish and unjustified paychecks, and saying to each other “I’m sure the threat will just go away in a few days, right, guys? We don’t need to do anything like hunt for the bad guys, or make some clandestine moves of equipment and personnel, do we? ‘Cause that would be what competent people do, and we’re government workers, so competence is ruled out by default.”
Fwiw, the new US embassy in London is basically a medeival fortress/castle, dressed up to be not:
Um, bin Laden’s location was based on intelligence. WMDs were pulled straight out Bush’s ass.
And you know this embassy thing was pulled from someone’s ass and not based on intelligence? How? Doesn’t the information that’s been reported kind of sound like intelligence?
And unfortunately blaming it all on Bush is misguided. His administration made the idiotic decision to go war, but Western intelligence had been wrong about Iraq and its weapons for years and years.
You win the thread.
“Yeah right! Conference call!” Am I a skeptic yet? 
Use your brain, common sense and super-secretive notion of Al Q (super-secretive as in, only US Government can reach them for comment) and tell me that in the world that we live today a bunch of alleged retards from several continents, representing very different ideas and already on the run decides to hold… wait for it… a conference call, a conference call whose mechanical nature enables whoever is snooping-in to narrow the search from a several hundred haystacks to a tailor’s cabinet drawer?
Ah, never mind … :o
Yes, it’s such an obviously, laughably bad lie that anyone of even moderate supergeniosity can see through it. This is fairly typical of conspiracy theory claims, for whatever that’s worth: the conspiracy is always described as a brilliant and cunning group that somehow manages to leave clues that are moronically obvious.
You realize these guys have websites and online forums and publications, right?
Bin Laden was “on the run” and not only was he still in touch with his subordinates (not over the phone, granted), he stayed in the same house for about five years.
I’ve read your response four times now, and I am no closer to understanding it than I was at first.
My point was simple: Obama (and his administration) were pilloried because of their supposed failure to properly handle the attack at Benghazi. Now we see many of the same people inveigh against Obama and his administration because of their cautious response to the current threat.
I don’t understand how your response relates to that claim.
Never said any such thing, but you go ahead and make stuff up if you like.
Western intelligence was wrong for years and years but now it’s all 100% thanks to NSA snooping on Americans which has nothing to do with the embassy closings.
Gotcha.
What are you complaining about now?
You making stuff up.