Napolitano Has No Clue At All

There was a terrorist attack on an airline that was headed into Detroit from overseas. The attack did not go off as planned because of a faulty detonator and the result was a burned terrorist. Make no mistake, if the bomb had gone off it would have taken the plane down. Janet Napolitano, Homeland Security Secretary is clueless about what all this means:

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says there is no indication that the man who attempted to destroy an airliner in Detroit on Christmas Day is part of a larger terrorist plot. Yahoo News

Well, it appears as if the bomber was helped out; “by al Qaeda leaders in Yemen who apparently sewed bomb materials into the suspect’s underwear…” [ABC]

Couple this with a report in the Sun UK that 25 British Muslims are involved in a plot to blow up airplanes and add to that the suspicious incident in an aircraft last month or so and I would say that this might be part of a larger terrorist plot. I would certainly say that there is at least that indication but the Secretary of Homeland Security does not see it that way.

No, this moron is too busy seeing people who served in the armed forces, those who oppose abortion, those who oppose what the government is doing and those who own guns as terrorists and part of a larger terrorist plot to be concerned with actual terrorism.

I am not the Secretary of Homeland Security but it seems to me that if al Qaeda was involved in this then it is part of a “larger terrorist plot.”

Then again, I have a clue and Napolitano is so lost she couldn’t find her rear if her hands were in her back pockets.

Perhaps this story of a “sharp dressed man” helping the terrorist on a plane even though he had no passport is a little more evidence that this was a coordinated effort and part of a larger terrorist plot.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama is on the case. He too is clueless in just about anything as evidenced by him being in Hawaii in a house that is worth millions of dollars on his vacation while the nation struggles with his 10% unemployment rate and his out of control deficit. Obama was notified about three hours after the alleged attack and is now on the case like Sherlock Holmes (maybe more like John Holmes considering what he is doing to the country). Military.com reports:

President Barack Obama has ordered a review of U.S. no-fly lists after a botched Christmas Day terror attack and demanded to know how a Nigerian man managed to board a Detroit-bound airliner wearing an explosive device.

Obama demanded to know how a Nigerian man boarded an airliner wearing an explosive device? I don’t know but it seems to me that this would be easier than a Kenyan hijacking the country and occupying the White House.

And yet Obama pulled that off…

Big Dog

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

35 Responses to “Napolitano Has No Clue At All”

  1. Darrel says:

    Bigd: “as evidenced by [Obama] being in Hawaii in a house that is worth millions of dollars on his vacation”>>

    DAR
    You got him there! Good one.

    Every time there is a failed attack on the US, or unemployment is about 10%, the president should make sure he does not go in any houses worth more than $2 million. This should be made into law.

    D.
    ————-
    “In my life, I have prayed but one prayer: “Oh Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.” And God granted it.” –Voltaire

  2. Darrel says:

    And speaking of not having a clue, this just in:

    “Two of the four leaders allegedly behind the al Qaeda plot to blow up a Northwest Airlines passenger jet over Detroit were released by the U.S. from the Guantanamo prison in November, 2007, according to American officials and Department of Defense documents.” —ABC News.

    Looks like Bush did another oops.

    D.

    • Big Dog says:

      This just in, for the less informed, those people were sent to Saudi Arabia and supposed to be rehabilitated, like you liberals wanted. The Saudis let them go. As is often the case, people released from Gitmo are not “innocent people” and end up back on the battlefield.

      So to recap, they were released to Saudi for rehab and the Saudis let them out.

      How is that Bush’s fault? Better yet, what assurance can Obama give us that the people he releases will not be in the same circumstances since some of them might well be released in the US?

      Yes, liberals demanded that Gitmo terrorists be released and when they are sent to other nations and then those nations released them liberals act like it was a mistake on the part of the US. The same liberals who wanted them released in the first place.

      So tell me, how is this an oops when they were released to Saudi under Saudi control and the Saudis let them go?

      But I can’t wait until some of those released by Obambam are back in the battle. Would love to hear your critique of that.

      I know you will blame Bush. It is such a knee jerk reaction for you that you blamed this on him when it was not his fault.

      And this does PROVE that Napolitano had no clue, lied, and that there was a larger plot. She is worthless and does not know her job. This is also not an isolated thing like Obama said. Hmmm, lied again.

      It also highlights why we need to keep Gitmo open. All of Obama’s work on closing it and the blather about it leading to more terrorism is nonsense. The terrorists know he is working to close it and they still committed an act of war against us on Christmas, a holy day.

      Lets bomb all of their countries on Ramadan or Eid.

      • Darrel says:

        Bigd: “they were released to Saudi for rehab and the Saudis let them out.
        How is that Bush’s fault?”

        DAR
        What part of Bush had them, Bush let them go, are you having trouble with?

        Bigd: “I can’t wait until some of those released by Obambam are back in the battle.”>>

        DAR
        This is Bigd accidentally revealing that he knows it is a very bad thing that Bush had them, and Bush let them go.

        Bigd: Would love to hear your critique of that.>>

        DAR
        I guess following your logic I could make the excuse that he loaned them to someone else first. But I wouldn’t do that. That would be stupid.

        Bush had them, Bush let them go. Don’t blame Bush for that!

        D.

  3. Adam says:

    “Then again, I have a clue…” … “…this would be easier than a Kenyan hijacking the country and occupying the White House.”

    You sound like you have a clue for sure.

    Merry Xmas, let’s bomb some countries…

    • Big Dog says:

      Are you saying that he is not Kenyan? His father was Kenyan and that makes him Kenyan. It is also my opinion that the country has been hijacked.

      Now, it would certainly be easier to get on a plane than do all this.

      I do find it funny that while your people are so thoroughly blowing our security you nitpick (you and Darrel) and ignore the actual topic. The topic for the ADHD among us, is that Napolitano has no clue and she lied about the incident and that she does not know what is going on. For the Secretary of DHS this is a problem.

      They are also treating this like a crime rather than an act of terror (which is an act of war) and that is what gave us 9/11.

      Welcome to the Democrat party.

      • Darrel says:

        Bigd: “Napolitano has no clue and she lied about the incident”>>

        DAR
        What? You haven’t shown a lie. Your report says:

        “Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says there is no indication that the man who attempted to destroy an airliner in Detroit on Christmas Day is part of a larger terrorist plot.”

        This leads you to say:

        “…and I would say that this might be part of a larger terrorist plot.”

        You haven’t even shown her statement, at that time, to be wrong, never mind a lie.

        Talk about clueless!

        D.

      • Adam says:

        I’m sorry that you didn’t get me to argue that Napolitano has no clue or that she lied since you’ve not provided any evidence worth arguing over.

        The biggest successes against terrorists have been law enforcement based so I don’t see why you think we need to continue to live in this fantasy land you like where the tur’ists just need to be all killed or rounded up and then America will be safe and sound again.

        We can just racially profile at the airport like Newt wants. That will work I’m sure…

        • Big Dog says:

          You don’t have to argue with me. Just read the Washington Examiner.

          Janet Napolitano forced a visibly annoyed Obama out of his calm reclusion by badly muffing her Sunday talk show appearances with an initial claim that “the system worked.” Expect Napolitano to be headed back to Arizona before June.

          While the temptation for the administration will be to believe that the plan would have worked if someone else had been the presidential proxy, the truth is that when vital systems under executive responsibility fail so thoroughly Americans expect the boss to own it.

          Writers Peter Baker and Scott Shane explain how political overconfidence led to an unforced error.

          “Administration officials said that during a weekend conference call they had resolved to use the Sunday shows to reassure the public, but that the ‘system worked’ formulation was not in written talking points. ‘Clearly (Napolitano) could have been more clear, and I think she was today,’ said one administration official, who declined to be identified discussing internal strategy.

          The visual contrast of a president on vacation while there was anxiety about air travel also drew fire. Although aides issued statements describing conference calls with counterterrorism advisers, pictures of passengers enduring tougher airport screening were juxtaposed with reports of the president picnicking at the beach and playing sports.”

        • Big Dog says:

          And we went from Napolitano saying the system worked to Obama saying it failed:

          President Obama said Tuesday that a “systemic failure” on multiple levels allowed a passenger armed with explosives to board a Detroit-bound flight last week.

      • Adam says:

        Obama was born in the United States of America and is the democratically elected the President of the United States.

        But sure, you can still have the opinion that he is Kenyan and hijacking the country. Being wrong has never stopped your opinions in the past, has it?

  4. Big Dog says:

    Since the guy said he was part of a larger plot (he said where he was trained and that there were more like him) I would think that would warrant not saying the attack was not.

    I also think saying that the system worked was a lie since she later said it did not.

    The system only worked if part of the plan is to have passengers take care of the terrorist after he boards the plane and tries to detonate a bomb. Since he was on the watch list and his father warned us about him I would say the system did not work.

    I know it is hard for you libs to admit that your peeps are not up to our security but don’t ignore what happened.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: Since the guy said he was part of a larger plot… I would think that would warrant not saying the attack was not.>>

      DAR
      This is all based upon a purposeful uncharitable interpretation of what she said.

      When the planes hit the Trade Center, it was “part of a larger plot” which included other hijackers and other planes.

      When she said (your source, paraphrase):

      “…there is no indication that the man who attempted to destroy an airliner in Detroit on Christmas Day is part of a larger terrorist plot.”

      It seems a plain reading would mean his attack was not coordinated with other planned attacks. Unless you can show otherwise, and you can’t, you got nothing.

      You got nothing. As per usual.

      D.

  5. Big Dog says:

    Of course Darrel, you are not only wrong but ignorant. You claim he had them and let them go. That is the only true part of the statement if we assume that let them go means that he sent them to Saudi and they had control of them. You also took my statement out of context, nothing unusual there, the two parts have to go together. When someone Obama sent to another country is back in the battle I expect the same critique from you.

    You libs want Gitmo closed and you want these people released. You keep clamoring for them to be sent to other places and when we do that and they are back in the battle you cry.

    We told you this would happen and you all insist that closing Gitmo is worth it. Well, you got what you wanted and it did not work out.

    You are lying and obfuscating to cover for the fact that Obama’s plan to close Gitmo and bring these people here is STUPID and shows a lack of leadership.

    Sorry Darrel, don’t be a moron. You are smarter than that.

    • Adam says:

      Yes, closing GITMO is worth it still even if one of them comes back to kill Americans. Personally I don’t want to live in a country that does something against our legal and moral foundations just in order to play it safe, just in case. We voted out that kind of garbage thinking along with the rats and roaches of the Bush administration.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: “the fact that Obama’s plan to close Gitmo and bring these people here is STUPID and shows a lack of leadership.”>>

      DAR
      Let’s see, Bush says he wants to close Gitmo, but doesn’t or can’t, and then when Obama does close Gitmo, he is the one showing a lack of leadership? No I don’t think so.

      Bigd: “When someone Obama sent to another country is back in the battle I expect the same critique from you.”>>

      DAR
      Beautiful. You look forward to a day when Obama may do, what your Bush already did. I’ll take that deal. You can’t even see your circles of hypocrisy.

      Your critique is a fantasy of a possible future event, mine is a current event that just happened.

      Bigd: “libs want Gitmo closed and you want these people released.”>>

      DAR
      What I want can never happen, because of Bush. A fair trial with the innocent released and the guilty punished.

      Let’s be blunt. Gitmo is Bush’s disaster 100%. It will always be Bush’s disaster 100%. Anything that ever comes out of the Gitmo legal nightmare and moral disaster, is and will always be, Bush’s fault 100%.

      D.

  6. Big Dog says:

    Closing Gitmo is worth it even if one of them comes back to kill Americans. Does that mean even if the ones they kill are you wife and parents?

    The people at Gitmo are kept in no different a circumstance than they will be in Illinois (if they even get moved to there) and they have not been mistreated.

    You seem to think that these people have the same rights as you and I. They do not.

    However, they have not been treated badly and moving them will not improve anything. This incident shows that the terrorists do not care about that stuff.

    As for profiling, we do that all the time. There is no reason we should not be able to more closely scrutinize the people from the Middle East who buy tickets with cash and raise other red flags.

    As a veteran I still get scrutinized more closely than the people who look like those who are committing the acts of terrorism.

    Napolitano does not know what she is talking about. She and others screwed the pooch on the Sunday talk shows. They blew it. You can ignore it but that does not make it any different.

    There were no more rats and roaches in the Bush administration than are in the Obama administration. His peeps are ethically challenged whether you choose to see it or not.

    Closing Gitmo and moving them to the US is STUPID and anyone who agrees with that is a moron. Fortunately the people near that prison are voicing their opposition.

    Adam, you might be OK with one of them being released and coming back to kill someone in your family. If one of them kills someone in my family I am going to hunt down the terrorist. Anyone responsible for his release might meet an untimely demise as well.

    You bleeding hearts are all the same. It is OK as long as we don’t hurt their feelings. Screw them and screw anyone who values them over Americans.

    Maybe we will get lucky and while they are being flown here the troops will open the back door and push them out.

    That would save us a lot of trouble.

    The soldiers should know by now, take no prisoners. They will get more rights than the troops who are accused of wrong doing.

    • Adam says:

      “You bleeding hearts are all the same.”

      As are you belligerent right wing nut jobs who compromise your morals because you pee your pants over terrorists. I’m not afraid of terrorists and I can’t control what they might do to me or my family. I won’t cower in fear like you cowards calling for racial profiling and torture and murder just so you can pretend to be tough on terrorism.

  7. kimspinney says:

    Adam reminds me of the concept, “arguing with idiots”.

    Can’t wait until next November when we kick ass and waste these sickening, elitist liberals lovers of everything wrong with this world.

    I find it remarkable how Big Dog has the patience to give Adam the time of day. He isn’t worth it.

  8. Big Dog says:

    No Darrel, you keep twisting words and saying things that I have not said and that are not correct. You do that a lot.

    But I am tired of arguing with you. Fine, you can call it all Bush’s fault. You can get on your knees and please Obama.

    Just go back to where you came from and leave me and my website alone.

    You will not change my mind EVER so stop trying. I will not change your mind and have no intention of doing that.

    So go back to where you came from and stop coming here and bothering me. I am tired of arguing with you and I am tired of your narrow minded stupidity.

    So please, I bid you ado. Leave, go home, stay away. I am not interested in discussing things with you. You seem like a nice guy but it is a waste of both our times and since you started coming here the number of people visiting has dropped dramatically.

    I have been told by more than a few they stopped coming because of you. I have to look out for the health of my site so please, just go.

    Darrel, you can continue to write here, I would not stop that unless you broke one of the rules but I am afraid that you will be engaged very little. However, if my visits drop any lower I am going to have to do something to change that.

    If you want to write start your own blog.

    Have a nice day.

    • Darrel says:

      We have a busy forum over here. Why don’t you come by and visit some time?

      Your email subscriptions are down a bit but that can’t have anything to do with me since surely those don’t include bits from the comment thread. You want more traffic? Maybe I should put the word out and get some freethinkers to come by? I did that but they quickly tire you it seems.

      Maybe you should have some new guests write some main articles. Adam could do a good job I’m sure. Or maybe I should write a few. A breath of fresh air eh? People must be getting tired of the constant stream of “Obama put his pants on left leg first today, therefore he is evil” nonsense.

  9. Big Dog says:

    Adam, the problem with public education is it gives us idiots. Islam or Muslim is NOT a race so there could be no racial profiling.

    We “cowards” are the ones who joined the armed forces. What did you do Mr. brave guy? What is it you did that was so brave? How is it you are so much better than those of us who have actually demonstrated we are not cowards?

    Torture is only torture if defined by the law. All methods used were in accordance with the law. Remember, if the law in the country says it is OK then it is OK (see abortion).

    These people do not have the same rights as we and they are not entitled to them. Bringing them here only causes problems. Like I said, if for some reason they are not found guilty then what do we do with them? Do we let them go in OUR country?

    You can have your I’m a tough liberal moment and call people cowards but we all know who would wet his pants if confronted with a threat.

    Don’t worry Adam, the men among us will continue to protect you.

    • Adam says:

      I’m sorry that you think your service to our country entitles you to be arrogant and belligerent and wrong on pretty much everything having to do with fighting terrorism and protecting our country.

      I’m not a tough liberal, I’m just not so afraid of terrorists like conservatives are that I sell out my morals justifying racism, war, and torture in the name of protecting our country. You should spend some time figuring out the difference this year. Make it your New Years resolution…

      You can say it’s not racial profiling but we both know you’re kidding yourself. How can you tell a Muslim from a non-Muslim at the airport? A terrorist from a non-terrorist? What will we profile for at the airport?

      • Big Dog says:

        Adam, once again you have trouble comprehending. I never said my service entitles me to anything. All I said was you are calling those of us who actually served cowards when you have done nothing to be elevated above that.

        Make it your New Year’s resolution to understand what race is. Since Muslim or Islam is not a race then it cannot be racial profiling. You libs like to use race as your fall back position and you do it so much you don’t actually know what race is. I am not kidding myself because Muslim and Islam are NOT a race. Are you having trouble with that concept? It is also true that Mexican is not a race so if you oppose illegals from the south you are NOT a racist. Learn what race is first before you use the word or decide who is kidding them self.

        We profile all the time. When a cop sees a rental car running down I95 he calls it in and decides if he should make a routine stop based on the profile of drug dealers who use rental cars to run drugs. If a white guy is in a predominantly black neighborhood known for drug sales then he is stopped, profiling.

        The police used actual racial profiling when they were looking for the DC sniper and no one complained.

        Oh yea, it is because they said the profile fit a white person. They even had news describing what the guy was likely to be like and how family should report them. The two snipers actually made it through a roadblock because they were black.

        And to refresh your memory, they were Muslim. But it was OK to profile and look for the white guy…

        You say I am wrong on pretty much everything having to do with fighting terrorism and protecting the country. I like the way I am arrogant and belligerent when you are the one who has the arrogance to assume you can make that determination. You have no experience whatsoever in defense, or fighting terrorism and you have the arrogance to say I am wrong. Do you see the hypocrisy here?

        I know you think that fighting this as a law enforcement issue is best and you and your lib buddies have the new mantra that law enforcement is best blah, blah. It is not and will not be best. When this was treated as law enforcement we got the WTC bombings, both of them.

        Conservatives are not afraid of terrorists and we do not sell out our morals. None of what happened was torture, the law said it was OK. You guys are the ones who tell us that if it is the law it is OK (look at abortion, once again). Speaking of that, I like how you will work to defend terrorists but ignore the innocent unborn. Darrel likes to say that abortion is legal because the law says so and that these kids have not been defined as people but when it comes to a law saying that enhanced interrogation is OK you all label it torture and say it is bad.

        How do you tell a Muslim from a non Muslim? A terrorist from a non terrorist? How they look might be one way. It is an absolute that you will find more Muslim terrorists by checking Middle Eastern men than you will by checking little old ladies and babies. Most of the attacks are by Middle Eastern men between 18 and 45. Start with them.

  10. Adam says:

    “I am not kidding myself because Muslim and Islam are NOT a race. Are you having trouble with that concept?”

    I never said they were a race, you’re just imagining that. I just said that folks are calling for racial profiling. What I should say is that they are calling for ethnic profiling. These people want one line for good white people and another line for bad old scary looking dark skinned folks. You can try to deny it but we all know it.

    “You have no experience whatsoever in defense, or fighting terrorism and you have the arrogance to say I am wrong. Do you see the hypocrisy here?”

    Since you are wrong, I can see no hypocrisy.

    “Speaking of that, I like how you will work to defend terrorists but ignore the innocent unborn.”

    I’m sorry that you still think life begins at conception and ends at birth.

    “I know you think that fighting this as a law enforcement issue is best…”

    It’s not that I think it, it’s just that law enforcement has been the most successful means of fighting and delivering justice to terrorists. You can continue to live in a fantasy world where our two wars have accomplished something useful in the fight against terrorism instead of making the problem worse, but it might be helpful to come over to reality at least once in a while.

  11. Big Dog says:

    Adam got his pink panties in a wad. I am not wrong, I am only wrong in your woefully pathetic views.

    No, law enforcement is not best or there would be no terrorism in the world.

    I live in reality because I have the experiences that you powder puff college kids who work on computers all day know nothing about.

    It is OK Adam, you can be a limp wristed pink pantie liberal who coddles bad people.

    And that begins at conception and ends at birth is lame but should apply to liberals. Is this a reference to the death penalty? Yes some crimes deserve the death penalty, what crime did the unborn commit? Christmas Day they found the 11 year old girl on the MD DE border. She had been kidnapped and murdered (autopsy will determine sexual assault). This was allegedly done by a sex offender who raped a little girl in the past. If he is found guilty he deserves the death penalty but in MD he won’t get it. If it were my daughter he would die before he ever got to trial.

    If you don’t like that and can’t see a difference then I feel sorry for any children you might bring into this world.

    Yeah Adam, it was those two wars that caused the second WTC attack (and the first as well). Oh wait, we were not at war we were using law enforcement. Law enforcement must increase terror and aid in recruiting.

    We need a national slap a liberal day. Why, every day should be slap a liberal day…

    • Adam says:

      Law enforcement has not been perfect against terrorism but it has by far been the most successful. The war on terrorism is a massive failure and it’s cost American lives and American dollars and we aren’t any more safe now than on 9/10. I know this. You know this. We all know this. Stop pretending.

  12. kimspinney says:

    Did you ever notice that liberals look like dipshits and twinkies. And because they look they way they do, or dress the way, they do they get rid⋅i⋅culized or sand it kicked in their face. Generally, they are asking for me and someone is merely following through on their request. Take Adam for example.

  13. Big Dog says:

    We were safer until Obama was elected. As Michael Chertoff said:

    For eight (Bush) years we frustrated plots because we spared no effort to examine and address any lead about a potential threat.

    But (things changed under Obama) as time passed, more people began to suffer from battle fatigue or to fall prey to historical revisionism.

    Critics expressed concern that American security was showing an unfriendly face to the world, discouraging travel and tourism.

    The airline industry balked at any measure that might cost time, money, or effort in the air travel process.

    Civil libertarians and others stridently campaigned against stricter identification-document requirements, more accurate scanning equipment, and intelligence-driven behavioral-pattern analysis.

    Spending money on shoring up failing industries crowded out the necessary sustained investment in deploying technology, hiring more air marshals, and building secure infrastructure.

    No Adam, you are the one who knows it. You use law enforcement when your citizens do things like McVey did. I don’t think that LE has much of a chance of working in other countries. Their LE is often part of the problem and ours has no jurisdiction.

    Engage them there so they will not be here.

    Massive failure? This coming from a guy whose world view and experience comes from a college text written by people like William Ayers…

    • Darrel says:

      [quote] “But (things changed under Obama) as time passed,…”>>

      DAR
      The idea that his “as time passed” comment refers to Obama’s 11 months is absurd.

      You are careful here not to include a link to Chertoff’s comments. The parenthetic comments are dishonest insertions from you and are misleading. If you are going to insert spin into a persons comments you should be up front about it and use square brackets to indicate that they did not originate with the person you are (mis)quoting. Better yet, don’t doctor their comments in the first place.

      D.

      • Darrel says:

        As I thought…

        “Just moments ago, All Things Considered’s Robert Siegel asked Michael Chertoff, who was Homeland Security secretary in the George W. Bush administration, whether he believes a key piece of intelligence about alleged would-be bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab would have been handled any differently when Bush’s Republican administration was running things than it was with President Barack Obama and other Democrats in charge.

        Chertoff said he does not think a “policy issue” — that is, any change in approach from one administration to the next — affected how the intelligence was handled. Rather, he said, the question is why the individuals who who received the information didn’t do more with it.”

        Audio here:

        http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/12/abdulmutallab_northwest_flight.html

        • Big Dog says:

          I never said email subscriptions were down, visits to the site are down.

          I believe I offered to let Adam write here a long time ago sort of like a Hannity and Colmes thing but he did not want to, as I recall.

          No Darrel, if you want to write you need to have your own blog.

        • Big Dog says:

          Maybe it was because the CIA is tired of being called liars and being whipping boys for Massa Obama.

          And I copied the comment just as I found it. I did not insert the parenthetic inserts (though the first does not change context).

          I merely forgot to link to the source.

          For a guy who claims to deal in facts you sure made a lot of assumptions on that one. First that I was careful not to include the link rather than forgot it and second that I inserted the extra words.

          Both assumptions are, of course, incorrect. I think you have read this site enough times to know that I identify when I add something including emphasis to any quote.

          Seems that your fact machine got some dog crap in its gears…

          I also forgot to emphasize the words that were added as the author of the original post did.

          You see, I merely made a mistake, an error. There was no attempt at deception. I must have been distracted and did not realize that I had not linked or pointed out the emphasized parts.

          So you know, here is a link to the place I got it and you will note the author clearly indicates that she added the words.

          You might want to check that logic and fact machine of yours. It allowed you to jump to conclusions in the face of evidence that should lead you to the contrary.

          I am not dishonest.

        • Darrel says:

          Bigd: “I am not dishonest.”>>

          DAR
          Excellent, glad to here it.

          Bigd: “your fact machine got some dog crap in its gears…”>>

          DAR
          How on earth would I get dog crap in my gears hanging around here?

          Oh, never mind.

          D.