Then what is our theory of where this plane is and why?
Lady Echo...we are still waiting for your words of wisdom on what happened to that plane! Still dreaming up a deflection post? Still just working to call names like you didn't at grade school recess? Why the silence? I thought you had all the answers and the questions?
Then what is our theory of where this plane is and why? Besides, I wasn't promoting any particular theory let alone a conspiracy, just wondering out loud. Wouldn't it make sense that if it were taken as ransom, as some in the media have suggested that we would have heard a demand by now? That's why I don't buy into that theory.
Some in the media have suggested that it could have been taken to be used later for some nefarious act, but they as well didn't know where they could land it, hide it or what they didn't with 239 people.
You need to calm down and stop looking for reasons to complain.
American security doesn't always apply in foreign airports. Interpol has stated quite often that many foreign countries don't check passport conditions carefully. Many don't use the Interpol data base of stolen or lost passports as often as they should.
I don't believe this plane was captured for ransom or someone would have already been claiming to have done so and asking for their prize. If they have taken it to use it as a flying bomb on some unsuspecting city, we are still at a very severe risk.
There might be several problems with your assumptions:
The ringing cell phones according to the major carriers is simply the network searching for a phone to contact, it doesn't necessarily mean that the individual phone is ringing.
The FAA and others have said that the transponder wouldn't just quit working because of an electrical failure unless it was a complete failure. There are several generators that are employed as redundant systems for this eventuality. Experts say it is a complicated process to turn this feature off, not simply a matter of throwing a switch.
The lack of debris, fuel slicks, pinging from the black boxes, etc. would lead on to anticipate this was not a simple 'accident'. Bear in mind the plane that crashed in the mid-Atlantic about a year ago was not located for several weeks. To your point, it is a big ocean out there and when you aren't sure which parts to search, it gets even larger.
To quote John Stuart Mill;
“Truth emerges from an unfettered competition of ideas and individual character is most improved when allowed to find its own way uncoerced.”
The truth of this matter is not fully known. How can you say that she is being targeted? She was in charge. It happened on her watch. She will not share what was going on and will not testify. Her actions certainly don’t generate a strong perception of good character.
If this were a Bush administration employee, she would have been tarred and feathered already and they would be attempting to impeach Bush. Innocent of what? Guilty of what? We can't tell because she won't tell.
Numbers don't lie; true, but those that put together the numbers for public consumption can and do. Science doesn't lie; mostly true. Often science can be found to be wrong versus the initial assumptions, science does include a great many assumptions, and scientists do lie, quite often. When there is academic acknowledgement to be had, money and grants to be had, reputations at stake, they will lie. They are simply a different animal in the political zoo.
Statisticians, both in and out of the government and in both Party's can and will make the numbers reflect the deduction they desire. Not always of course, but when under apprehension of numbers reflecting poor performance, they will.
The government has the experience of putting out job growth, unemployment, and economic statistics on a regular basis. They should have few reasons to constantly revise the numbers they publish. Except of course when they desire better numbers, or an opportunity to tell why their performance isn’t up to snuff.
Why is it that liberals believe all the statistics that are published by Democratic administrations, but not from the other side?
Obama may have shot himself in the foot with all the rules and changes to the rules. First, with all the delay's, the ACA won't generate all the 'projected' savings the Democrats are touting, they won't save the insured the amazing amounts of money he projected and lied about. Next, the only way this program survives as predicted is if they young people sign up in large numbers to offset the costs for others, and when you take that group and allow anyone under the age of 26 to stay on their parents policy, you just cut that groups population down considerably.
Not real clever.
Ms. Learner has not shared anything. Why? What does she know that will cause her to incriminate herself? What does she h=know that will incriminate anyone else.
Guess what, we don't know because she won't talk. That mean that all the FACTS are not known. they should keep digging until the full truth and ALL the FACTS are known. Then and only then can anyone make a final determination of what happened, who was a fault and should anyone be prosecuted for what they did. Until we know all that, it is not and should not be over.
And it is so confusing that they can't get it right the first time in most any month and the numbers have to be revised each month///lately usually downward.
They count only the people they want to count. They don't count those that have fallen off of the UE stats. The number of unemployed people in this country is high, very high and is not falling at near the rate the government wants the population to believe just ahead of an election. The shovel ready jobs that apparently didn't have shovels, and those that have been out work for over a year and some two years are not examples of a 'rebounding' economy.
You might want to ask Tina Fey what she can see from her porch, since she is the one that made that quote famous.
Why would a good attorney counsel a client not to cooperate the authorities to share the truth? What is she hiding? Someone is telling her not to talk. If it is only her attorney, then they must know that she has done something wrong. Does anyone know who is paying here legal team?
What is wrong with the TRUTH?
Really, what are the obvious reasons for hiding the truth? What does she consider a proper reason for hiding the truth. What was the truth that she cooperated with the investigator about that still leaves unanswered questions? Why are the facts of her cooperation not being shared with the citizens or even a Congressional Committee?
"She believes she is being politically targeted" Targeted for what? Targeted for the truth? Targeted because she broke the law? Repeatedly dragged before a lynch mob? She has been called what, twice and both times refused to tell the truth. And that is on the Republicans? The Republicans didn't target certain groups for delay and refusal of their rights.
This lady gets and deserves no sympathy until she tells the truth. Let he negotiate a deal, give her immunity, but make her tell the truth. Is the 5th amendment part of the Obama 'transparency' campaign?
Where there is smoke, there is fire or a liar.
My suggestion or question, whichever term you choose was not presented as evidence, simply as a question wondering why she would be threatened. Do you really think a conservative would threaten her if she told the whole truth? To what gain?
There has to be a reason that she will not tell what she did or say or was told. There has to be more of a story than a 'few misguided' employees in a remote IRS office. Even most Democrats have to believe that there is something behind her claiming the 5th. What did she do wrong that she is afraid to admit? Did she do it all on her own, or was she told to what to do?
Until the TRUTH, not the shaded facts of a Democratic DOJ 'investigation' is known this incident should not go away.
Just more deflection. And then more deflection. The point is that Obama thought he could change the world just by talking sense to them and getting everyone to see the magic of his speeches. Then he found out that most of the world weren't listening or simply ignoring him, when they weren't laughing at him.
Putin will run circles around Obama because he doesn't as he wishes and dares anyone to stop him and Obama won't.
I drew a red line, no I mean the world drew a red line and we will not tolerate anyone crossing it...well maybe, perhaps we will just let Putin run this operation, or maybe not; is it time for my next vacation or gathering of black talent at the White House to celebrate something?
We want to rule the world with our foreign affairs intelligence, or maybe we just want to suggest what we think people might want to do, if we can't talk them into it, then they just aren't listening to my words of wisdom.
What a ego this fool has.
Obamacare to take effect in 2013, no maybe in 2014, oops how about 2016. We can't have all the changes and complaints while we are trying to win elections. That is not the way of the world...we have to have something to pin on the opposition, not the other way around. Delay, delay, subsidize, subsidize and confuse...yeah that's the ticket...good plan.
John McCain held John McCain back. The man might be a war hero, but he is not an honest politician (most aren't) and he is certainly not a conservative or Republican in practice.
Just more deflection. You never once addressed the fact of the low life comments you made about a disabled veteran. You completely ignored that little incident. Oh and by the way, I am not artherbkz602 and have no idea who that is and frankly don't care.