What is Digg?Sponsored by FUNimation Enertainment
Amphibian invaders! Can frogs conquer the Earth? view!
funimation.com - Stranded frog platoon battles for Earth and our sushi. Season 1, Part 2 available 11/24
620 Comments
- blckngldhwk, on 05/05/2009, -29/+300Photographer probably forgot to take the lens cap off.
- Landthatilove, on 05/05/2009, -37/+194They have pictures of Air Force One. They have pictures of fighter jets. Surely they have some guy with enough technical knowledge to take a picture of New York and photoshop Air Force One and some fighters in it. I could be wrong, but I think that would have cost a helluva lot less and wouldn't have caused near as much bad publicity. Dumb asses.
- inactive, on 05/05/2009, -37/+156So what were they for?
- magicalnoodles, on 05/05/2009, -31/+119This is not a partisan issue. I want to see the photos.
- TheoWelles, on 05/06/2009, -6/+84Uggghhh, I'm tired of all this partisan backand forth *****!
- It was a stupid idea for a photoshoot.
- I believe the photos aren't being released because of a potential backlash for releasing them (it could be interpreted as supporting the idea of a stupid photoshoot)
- This is not a political issue! Stop making everything a polarizing political issue! *Gets driven crazy*
Im Australian btw. - dehnomac, on 05/05/2009, -66/+140"Let me say it as simply as I can: TRANSPARENCY and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency," - Barack Obama
In the words of the the late great Emily Litella "NEVER MIND". - gfryesc, on 05/05/2009, -31/+89they were for his 2012 re-election campaign probably. So we'll see them when the short attention span of the collective has forgotten about them.
- inactive, on 05/05/2009, -31/+82Once he commits a high crime or misdemeanor. His only crime at the moment is you not liking him.
- directedition, on 05/06/2009, -13/+62They were for public release. But since Obama didn't approve of the Air Force's use of the plane, he isn't going to release the photos. It would be a bit hypocritical to release them after bashing the stunt publicly.
- inactive, on 05/05/2009, -50/+98Actually, we didn't get any useful, timely intelligence from torture, as stated by the experts.
- sugarazor, on 05/06/2009, -34/+82Really, we're turning THIS into a conspiracy?
Congrats wingnuts, you've officially entered Troofer territory. - inactive, on 05/05/2009, -28/+74Brigadier General David R. Irvine, retired Army Reserve strategic intelligence officer who taught prisoner interrogation and military law for 18 years with the Sixth Army Intelligence School, says torture doesn't work.
A former FBI interrogator -- who interrogated Al Qaeda suspects -- says categorically that torture does not help collect intelligence. On the other hand he says that torture actually turns people into terrorists.
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/10/fbi-interroga ...
A 30-year veteran of CIA’s operations directorate who rose to the most senior managerial ranks, says:
“The administration’s claims of having ‘saved thousands of Americans’ can be dismissed out of hand because credible evidence has never been offered — not even an authoritative leak of any major terrorist operation interdicted based on information gathered from these interrogations in the past seven years. … It is irresponsible for any administration not to tell a credible story that would convince critics at home and abroad that this torture has served some useful purpose.
This is not just because the old hands overwhelmingly believe that torture doesn’t work — it doesn’t — but also because they know that torture creates more terrorists and fosters more acts of terror than it could possibly neutralize.”
http://www.truthout.org/article/the-truth-is-out-c ...
A former US Air Force interrogator said that information obtained from torture is unreliable, and that torture just creates more terrorists
http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2008/12/when ...
high-level CIA official Bob Baer said "And torture -- I just don't think it really works ... you don't get the truth. What happens when you torture people is, they figure out what you want to hear and they tell you."
Rear Admiral (ret.) John Hutson, former Judge Advocate General for the Navy, said "Another objection is that torture doesn't work. All the literature and experts say that if we really want usable information, we should go exactly the opposite way and try to gain the trust and confidence of the prisoners."
Michael Scheuer, formerly a senior CIA official in the Counter-Terrorism Center, said "I personally think that any information gotten through extreme methods of torture would probably be pretty useless because it would be someone telling you what you wanted to hear."
Dan Coleman, one of the FBI agents assigned to the 9/11 suspects held at Guantanamo said "Brutalization doesn't work. We know that. "
... BUT, you guys can continue to pretent the U.S. doesn't torture and, if we do, it's OK because Al Qaeda does too. I don't get my morals from Al Qaeda. Instead, I stand for what I believe in.
Cowards. - markgl, on 05/05/2009, -40/+86Screw that! We paid all that money. I want that photo in a frame and mailed to my house!
- chesterogilvie, on 05/05/2009, -46/+87Why not release them after all the commotion? Are there really any pictures?
- Swarms, on 05/05/2009, -52/+93I think it's funny how many people are going through and burying every comment. This is as non-partisan of a story as you can get I think, but it mentions Obama so they have to have his back. We paid $300,000 for a photo-op, and now he's not going to release the photos. I still haven't heard a justification from any of you that are burying every comment.
- inactive, on 05/05/2009, -5/+40Yeah wake up sheeple, there are absolutely no two seat F-16s!
Oh wait: http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&um=1& ...
Well I guess not everything in the world is a conspiracy. - LimeParrot, on 05/06/2009, -21/+52Buried for trying to justify torture.
- inactive, on 05/05/2009, -10/+38Nope. I guaran-damn-tee you that the sortie wasn't only scheduled for a photo op. That was a portion of the mission that day; however, they most likely had other training which probably included aerial refueling and touch-and-go practice. Not to mention the fact that the rejoin with the F-16 and the aerial photography experience gained by the military photographer would have been valuable training as well.
So saying they spent $300,000 on a photo op comes from a deep seeded ignorance of how things are done in the US Air Force. The 89th AW in particular takes its training VERY seriously. It also takes an immense amount of pride in the job it does.
That said, whomever made the decision not to notify the NYC public made a dumb mistake. The decision not to release the photos makes sense to me, but in any case those who look at Obama and can't see anything except demon eyes, scales, horns and cloven hooves would have also attempted a crusade had the pictures been released.
My only pleasure is to see you and your ilk in a frothy whip for no good reason. It only makes you look insane and pedantic. - inactive, on 05/05/2009, -8/+36I know it was because I was aircrew in the USAF.
One purpose of the flight was to get pics. Only flying from DC to NYC for a photo-op in a 747 is a colossal waste of valuable training time in a squadron that only has 2 aircraft. Every member of the squadron (pilots, navigators, electronics officers, flight attendants, etc) has a certain number of training requirements they have to get done. There are certain things that have to be done in the simulator (simulated emergencies), certain things that can be done in the simulator (a certain number of landings probably and maybe one simulated AR contact, I'd have to look at the 11-2VC25-Vol III to know for sure), and certain things which must actually be accomplished in the aircraft. Since the VC-25s have an awful lot of actual missions where training is not allowed, they have to get their training in on the relatively few missions they have.
I'd love to see your source for the mission plan so I can help you understand it. The "refueling *****" is merely refueling training. Airborne refueling is very difficult and very dangerous (I was a navigator in the KC-135, so I've seen both ends of it and know this as a fact). We don't really have the information, but it's not unreasonable to guess that there was some refueling training involved in this training mission. It probably consisted of a rendezvous and several connects and disconnects along an air refueling route. That's standard air refueling training. I'm not sure if the navigators on the VC-25 have a celestial navigation requirement, but if they do then there was likely a nav leg associated with the flight as well. A nav leg is generally between 1 and two hours and will take the aircraft on a course that may have no other purpose than to train the navigator. Yes, there was a "rejoin" with the fighter aircraft since it is impossible for a VC-25 and 2 F-16s to take off in formation. Again, your supreme ignorance about this issue is showing. Following the flight there was most likely at least an hour and probably more like 2 or even 3 hours of touch and go training. I can say with some certainty that this was probably not a check ride since it is a fairly abnormal profile.
I seriously doubt that the sole purpose of the flight was for a photo op. In fact, if the only reason they flew that day was to fly from DC to NYC to take a few pictures and then to fly home, we should all be far more upset than if it really was some contrived joy ride for some unknown lobbyist. It would be a waste of a sortie and a waste of training opportunities in a squadron that no doubt needs the training.
Stop arguing from ignorance. You don't know how USAF flying squadron, group, or wing training is accomplished. You don't have a clue as to how day-to-day operations are handled. I don't blame you for that, it's fairly mundane and most documentation is fairly obscure so you wouldn't know where to look or what you were looking for anyhow. Not knowing is fine but arguing from ignorance is asinine and makes you look like a complete tool. - inactive, on 05/05/2009, -24/+52Because he won't release photos?
Are you nuts? - professor357, on 05/05/2009, -114/+141So basically, the 0bama Administration blew more than $300,000 on a photo op, and now we don't even get to see the photos?!
Anyone wonder just who in this country is supposed to "sacrifice" for the good of the country? It sure isn't "The One" and his people.
And has the main stream media done ANY investigation as to just who might have got a unique joyride on "Air Force One", courtesy of the White House. How much do you have to contribute to 0bama to earn that?
Also, I'd note that they had a similar "training flight" scheduled for the Washington D.C. area. No doubt that would include buzzing the Pentagon and the Washington Monument. - FredFredrickson, on 05/05/2009, -52/+79You conservatives are so shameless in your efforts to try to find something wrong with *anything* the Obama administration does, it's embarrassing. Funny thing is, most of the country ignores all this stupid, false outrage, and is actually quite impressed and happy with the administration so far.
You've already cried wolf so many times, how well do you think anyone's going to listen if anything actually does go horribly wrong? - thegrantman, on 05/05/2009, -14/+41The N.Y. Times just reported that the pictures will indeed be released....after they edit out the screaming people.
- inactive, on 05/05/2009, -20/+46Bush lied and got us into a war, tortured people and passed and went through with a lot of constitutionally questionable policies. By the time we had real solid evidence, it was too late to bother. There's a huge difference between that and a poorly planned photo op
- inactive, on 05/05/2009, -22/+47I voted for the guy but ever since he was the Commander in Chief of the military when the 89th Airlift Wing decided to update their publicity photos and since he refused to release those photos I've been crying myself to sleep at night.
Oh if I had only voted McCain or written in Ron Paul. Oh boo hoo hoo! McCain or Paul would have done things differently. One of them would have had the 89th CC's head in a vice on day one in order to extract any and all information about possible upcoming photo ops in the New York City air space.
My God, what have I done??????? - tpmidd, on 05/05/2009, -56/+80So let me get this straight, the Obamabots are outraged that President Bush wouldn't allow photos of dead soldiers, but happy that President Obama is hiding photos of Air Force One? Huh?
- Verchiel77, on 05/05/2009, -20/+44Perfectly, especially listening to folks gnash their teeth over things like Birfer conspiracies and "arrogance."
Music to my ears... - wtrwlkr, on 05/06/2009, -8/+31They were already there with the birth certificate "controversy"
- FredFredrickson, on 05/05/2009, -14/+36They sleep a lot better than the dolts who voted the previous president into office, I bet.
"saturated in arrogance" ROFL - C0ntraRadical, on 05/05/2009, -13/+35I'm not going to rehash the whole conversion but the second wave attack was foiled months before any detainees were tortured.
- inactive, on 05/05/2009, -5/+26Yes, we know part of the mission involved aerial photography. They left out the parts they (and you) don't understand which is the routine training parts of the mission.
Seriously, just admit your ignorance with respect to how training and how missions are accomplished in the USAF and move on. This isn't a good issue for you to be a mindless zombie pit bull on. Unclench your jaws and try to understand that there may be a lot you don't know and that not everything in the world is a big democratic plot to ass rape you. - inactive, on 05/05/2009, -5/+26The air force knows that you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to the training requirements and/or procedures of the VC-25. I've been on hundreds of AERIAL REFUELING MISSIONS where the aerial refueling was only one part of a mission that included hours of pattern work, simulated emergency situations, etc. It was an aerial photo mission in the sense that one part of the mission was for aerial photography.
Like I said, if the 89th is wasting its training hours by only flying from DC to NYC to do a photo op and not getting anything else out of it, I'll be pissed and call my congressman. So unless you've got anything more substantial than a dumbed-down label for the mission, then you can go jump in a ***** river. You don't know how much you don't know about this issue and every time you speak you make a bigger fool of yourself. - inactive, on 05/05/2009, -32/+53Amazing, isn't it?
I think it shows a latent, deep seated, fear that Obama is a fraud (like a lot of us said he was) and they simply don't want to face the possibility and don't want anyone to start wondering either. - secrity, on 05/05/2009, -1/+22There are 2 seat F-16s that are intended to be used for training and aerial photography.
- rebotfc, on 05/06/2009, -19/+39You wingnuts are ***** crazy.
- inactive, on 05/06/2009, -7/+27After taxpayers pay for a $300,000 photo, shouldn't they get to see it?
- mgraham80, on 05/06/2009, -5/+24LOL! This is comedy gold!
- Phearce, on 05/06/2009, -7/+26"The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."
retired Adm. Dennis Blair, the director of national intelligence - USArugula, on 05/05/2009, -34/+53"So basically, the 0bama Administration blew more than $300,000 on a photo op, and now we don't even get to see the photos?! "
Oh, come now, professor. You know as well as I do that you folks would give them just as much hell if they released those photos. It's damed if they do, damned if they don't with you folks.
For the middle ground though, publicizing the results of an ill-conceived photo op only compound the issue. It's kind of like getting caught in bed with another woman and, rather than contrition, deciding "What the hell, might as well finish up here." - AgeofMastery, on 05/05/2009, -32/+51A paper, owned by Rupert Murdoch and with a slightly worse reputation than the Enquirer is citing an unnamed aide to the president.
That's pretty damn convincing I must say. Are any other networks carrying this story? - inactive, on 05/05/2009, -8/+26Show me the evidence that it wasn't and I'll get mad for different reasons than you
- inactive, on 05/05/2009, -7/+25All you're saying is that you want to assume the worst because you have some kind of ridiculous political vendetta.
"you should have stayed in the AF because you seem pretty well brainwashed and naive."
So you're saying the fine men and women who serve this country proudly in the US military are brainwashed and naive? Care to elaborate on that? I'm sure we'd all love to hear it. - ginetteginette, on 05/06/2009, -2/+19i'm saddened i had to scroll this far to see a comment i could digg up.
- Pippers, on 05/06/2009, -2/+18They regularly fly these planes over monuments all over the world taking pictures. They then keep them on hand for when they land at Air Force bases in whatever region they're in. The pilots, president, whoever then sign them and give them to the troops at the base as a way of thanking them for their service and keeping the base secure while Air Force One is stationed there. They do pictures like this all over the world. The only issue with this particular photo was that they happened to do a low level training run at the same time, over a city that has had a terrorist attack by... low flying planes. It was a hilariously poor decision, but the pilots do these training flights several times a week. They are required to, otherwise they can't fly. They have to dock x many hours per week flying Air Force One doing x type of sorties. The low level chase they did in New York would have been done somewhere else had it been turned down. The pilots are probably doing dive bombing runs as I type this over bald Eagles that are crying right now. It's nothing new, and I'm not sure why the news even followed it this much.
- inactive, on 05/05/2009, -8/+24When the press doesn't know and/or doesn't care about the rest of the mission, you're only going to get the details specific to the part of the story they're interested in: the photo op over NYC. They're not going to bother reporting on the rest of the mission because it isn't relevant to their story. Nobody cares if the VC-25 went back to do 1+30 in the pattern or did AR101 N/S with a practice breakaway. Nobody knows what that means and it isn't germane to them scaring the ***** out of the island of Manhattan.
So until such time as you can get a detailed report of the full mission profile for the VC-25 that day, you can, as we say in the USAF, shut up and color. You don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about and yet you're looking for any way to make this a lance you can shove into Obama's skull. Why? Because of your irrational hatred of anything to do with Obama. - inactive, on 05/06/2009, -13/+29LOL
The administration that lied time and time again came out claiming 'oh we got good info!' and the chumps believe them.. again. Turns out the 'second wave' wasn't even a serious attempt, and the loons behind it were all hauled away a year before KSM was tortured.
*****, you right wingers are dumb. - inactive, on 05/05/2009, -12/+27I'm defending the good men and women of the 89th Airlift Wing. Why do you hate the troops?
- inactive, on 05/05/2009, -6/+21How much do you know about the day-to-day operations of an airlift flying squadron?
- inactive, on 05/05/2009, -36/+51I doubt it. That was the cover story....and not a very good one at that. It was probably a joy ride for Obama campaign donors.
- mgraham80, on 05/06/2009, -4/+19earnold, the best part is you think you made a useful or insightful observation. lol....
-
Show 51 - 100 of 647 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is