Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

The libs were all happy when the NIE saying that Iran was no longer working on nukes came out. Wonder if they will listen when the same entity becomes the bearer of bad news rather than their favored propaganda?
1 posted on 03/13/2013 10:38:30 AM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Olog-hai

Clapper is on the cutting edge of hindsight.


2 posted on 03/13/2013 10:50:31 AM PDT by stylin19a (obama - Fredo smart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Olog-hai

Is there even one sensible observer who expected any other outcome?


3 posted on 03/13/2013 11:24:27 AM PDT by Pollster1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Olog-hai

No sh*t?


4 posted on 03/13/2013 1:49:27 PM PDT by Check6 (United States of Moronia: A nation of morons ruled by a gang of communist thugs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Olog-hai
"The “Arab spring” has benefited Islamists rather than democracy advocates, while political transitions and unrest in the region have provided opportunities for terrorists to mount attacks against U.S. interests, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told lawmakers Tuesday. …"

This clown should've quit after he invented that handclap light-on/light-off thing for seniors...

...sheesh

5 posted on 03/13/2013 1:51:19 PM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Olog-hai

6 posted on 03/13/2013 1:57:42 PM PDT by Bratch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Olog-hai

Clapper always did have a grasp of the blindingly obvious.


9 posted on 03/14/2013 8:51:02 AM PDT by Cyber Liberty (I am a dissident. Will you join me? My name is John....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Olog-hai
The “Arab spring” has benefited Islamists rather than democracy advocates

When Americans talk about democracy, we are generally conflating two distinct things.

1. A civil society with individual rights.

2. Rule by the majority of the people, usually by means of free elections.

This is because we assume, without anything even vaguely resembling evidence, and despite a great deal of evidence to the contrary, that if #2 is in effect the people will always choose to implement #1.

But a society with #1 but without #2 is theoretically possible, and indeed has existed to varying degrees at different times in history.

And various regimes have been wildly popular with their people, and even had more or less free elections, but did not implement #1.

IMO #1 is the goal, and #2 merely the historically most effective way of implementing it. But as we have seen in Iran and Egypt, free elections do not necessarily translate to freedom for individuals.

All of this is based on the American faith that "the people" can't be wrong. Which is of course utter nonsense.

10 posted on 03/14/2013 8:58:19 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson