member for 10 weeks 4 days
My Dad brought up a great question today … if Obama has any ties to terrorists, how can he gain government clearance at one of the highest levels in order to have access to the government’s most guarded secrets?
Dad worked for Martin Marietta (now Lockheed Martin). When he gained level-II (Secret or S) clearance for his job, they did a very intense background check on him. I was in Jr. High School at the time and recall being asked the names of my friends. So, if Obama has ties with known terrorists and a history of traveling to countries that promote anti-American sentiment, how can he get cleared as Commander-In-Chief? I’m not bashing Obama here – but I thought this question had merit and with the knowledge, experience and wisdom of the Alpha Women on this site, thought someone might be able to shed some light here.
Doing a little research, I found some notes that suggest he would automatically gain clearance if elected President. Is this true??? Does he automatically get level-III (Top Secret) Clearance or is there a higher level for the President? If any other American with similar connections would likely be denied any government job requiring security clearance – is this fair? Does popular American vote override established processes to ensure national security?
Before you Obama fanatics get your pretty blue panties in a wad -- I’m not suggesting Obama would spill national secrets to his friends in Pakistan – I’m trying to understand how the U.S. security system works.
Learn something new and frightening every day! ;o)
Comments
Login or register to post a commentFrom a Non-Obama fanatic with Green Panties
Thoughtful post Christine. While I have no idea whatsoever what kind of clearance or top secret access U.S. presidents have-nor do I have any idea how all that stuff works, I do have a response regarding Obama's association to "terrorists."
The only valid information about the claim that Obama has connections terrorism involves a guy by the name of William Ayers who founded a radical anti war group in the sixties.
What are those connections? Well Bill Ayers contributed a whopping $200 to Barack's campaign and he sat on a board to promote education reform (or something related w/education) with him. That's it. Granted, they probably worked closely together on that board, but until someone can prove to me that they are plotting some left wing conspiracy or more bombings I will continue to remain confident that this is the workings of another smear tactic.
And the argument that Obama is not giving up any information regarding his ties to Ayers is also becoming very tiresome. I wouldn't acknowledge it either if I were him. It is the equivalent of tabloid garbage.
There is no other evidence that Barack Obama has connections with terrorism other than that. Not nationally or internationally.
Nobody denies that William Ayers was an active participant in the Weatherman group who claimed responsibility for a dozen or so bombings from 1970-1974, and an accidental explosion in their "bomb factory" that killed 3 people. But Ayers himself was never convicted of any crimes, including those associated with the group (Which admittedly is very odd). In addition there is no evidence at all whatsoever that Ayers has committed any crimes since that time nor is there any evidence to suggest that he or Obama are up to any terrorists plots.
I think it is fair to think that Ayers should have served time for his participation in those violent acts, but for whatever reason, a jury didn't. Since that time the man has worked for greater causes that to me don't say he's a building bombs anymore. I don't think that excuses the past, I just don't think that implicates Obama in any wrong doing.
Here's an interesting article about the whole thing.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/0...
I don't think the term "known terrorist" is all together that accurate especially considering that we still live in a country where we are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Ayers is a former member of an extremist organization that committed acts of domestic terrorism almost 40 years ago.
There is a guy by the name of Chuck Colson who served under the Nixon Administration. He was considered one of Watergate's Seven, and later served prison time for his involvement in a similar scandal. Like Ayers, Colson has spent his life since the seventies, working toward social justice issues. Colson is highly respected in the field of Prison Ministry and beyond, and is committed now to advocating for the humane treatment and comprehensive rehabilitation of convicted criminals. If Chuck Colson gave $200 to Obama's campaign, would we think Obama had a connection to corrupt leaders? I don't think we would.
Ayers is a very liberal guy. I don't think he makes any apologies for that, and from what I've heard, he doesn't make any apologies for his former actions (I don't know for sure though.) But he has dedicated his life to speaking on behalf of the poor and marginalized. While I do struggle to reconcile the guy's former actions with his 40 years of service to education, and social justice, the idea that he poses a threat to society in a way that would compromise Obama's integrity as a leader is just not credible-regardless of what our countries security process is.
"Speak not in the ears of a fool: for she will despise the wisdom of thy
words."
Proverbs 23:9
Having Tea with Sarah Palin...she put something it dear
The color of my panties (?) This is a weird weird post. Are you from Alaska did you go to Sarah's High School I do not get you at all.
With all due respect
With all due respect Zen_nonna what are you talking about?
I believe the original post suggesting that Obama fanatics not getting their blue (dem colors) in a wad was just a joke in reference to the highly tense blog exchanges that have been going back and forth on Alpha.
I responded in kind by saying that I had Green panties (as a joke) to express my affiliation with the Green Party.
I am not sure who your post is directed to, but it doesn't seem to relate much to the original post or my response to it.
"Speak not in the ears of a fool: for she will despise the wisdom of thy
words."
Proverbs 23:9
thank you for clarifying
Thank you, for acknowledging and explaining my attempt at humor and promoting a light-hearted blog! ;o)
Anyway, I do get your point and my perspective was not that Obama is currently, or was in any way tied to the activities of Ayers – but nevertheless, there is a history and association between the two. I don’t believe, and I’m not trying to lead others to believe that Obama is working with this guy to plot future bombings. My questions are more to the point of how “security” works and does someone who is elected President get an automatic pass? It’s my understanding of security clearance levels that this type of association, regardless of level of involvement or type of relationship would typically pop up as a red-flag when trying to obtain clearance. I thought it was an interesting question that never occurred to me. I’m hoping there is an Alpha Woman out there who is familiar with the topic and might provide a little insight on the matter because I didn’t find a sufficient answer through web surfing (granted, I didn’t spend hours on research).
But, in the event that anyone took my post as a warning that Obama is plotting against Americans – that was not what I intended to imply -- thank you for clarifying. You know your stuff!
Twisted Knickers!
I should say that I am not able to answer your 'security' question, but I wanted to say that no matter your particular politics, you posed a very intelligent question which everyone should consider. I have some time on my hands and am going to see if I can find out more. That is what I do best!
To the best of my current knowledge, the Presidential candidates must be vetted prior to the primaries or else they cannot seek nomination. A comprehensive background check should be completed. Please correct me if I am wrong there. Diplomats have immunity from prosecution but whether that applies to Presidents, I am not sure. The opportunity to ask someone with a deep knowledge the American political process will arise in the next few days.
I should tell you I am not American by birth, but by choice. I did not come here until I was 52, and had a fulsome life previously. In the 9 years since I arrived, I have made it my business to become informed on all matters of the economy, politics and the American Dream! Total immersion! Despite teaching economics for a trillion years though, I am perplexed by the enormity of the financial meltdown which I now see as a train running out of control. Am reading up about that too.
Your post was not taken as a 'warning'
so despite my lighthearted headline...I do not have my pink lace and animal print knickers in a twist at all. 
Hope someone can provide the answer for you but I shall see what I can find out!
"Dreams are Food for the Soul, it is the Dream that keeps you alive!"
My reply
Was to the original post and the fanatics, Pakistan and panties. Not your answer
I mean really, honestly, truly!!! Really??
Christine, no offence to you, your most sincere doubts, questions or lack of clarity on pertinent issues of national security but, from an international perspective (mine), - as one of many non-American, Obama lovers, who has never owned a pair of blue panties, I say to you, if at this stage of the game I still had a conserviative, fear/war/security mongering tendency left, one that continues to live in denial about being part of the cause of the doubt and ignorance that has spawned the stupidity of a corrupt America...I'd be hoping, praying in fact, that Obama not only wins Presidency but that he somehow manages to SAVE the minds/hearts of so many very small-minded and misled American people, those I can only call 'global village idiots', who could in any way make a connection between Obama and terrorism. Has a more dangerous terrorist existed than 'Bush'?? - the atrocities of that government seen from outiside the US make Obama and some name association question seem like idle political masturbation.
Thank you for adding this
Thank you for adding this message in reply to my post after sending it to my personal e-mail, and allowing me to clarify my point (once again). I apologize to the Alpha Women for any confusion caused by my little quip about panties … just trying to emphasize that my post was intended as a light-hearted discussion regarding how national security works, not a biting political debate. So, forgive me if I took some liberties with this blog to enjoy a little "political masturbation" as you so cleaverly stated.
Again … Apparently, based on your comments and insults, you have much disdain for Americans. I hope your reply provided some release of your bottled-up hostilities. If not, you might want to try masturbation – it provides great tension relief in a time when most of us have had to cut way back on our spa visits.
to spa or not??
It seems you're inclined to take snippets of fact and half-truths from disparate elements and weave them into larger-than-life blanket statements that I struggle to make sense of.
At no stage in my text did I refer to a general distaste for American people, however.....and read very slowly to not miss the point....yes, you are quite right, in the eyes of many there seems to exist a large following in America of conservatively-driven, small-minded, ill-informed and dangerously arrogant people that many are not not fond of.
In terms of bottled-up hostilities, I think your concern should be for the bottled-up hostilities that drive that large body of people I just made mention of - mine should hardly be your concern - however, rest assured, bottled-up hostility is definitely not what most people would accuse me of having.
On your last point, masturbation; indeed you are on the right track now - it is not the deliciously good type I was referring to at all!!! - it's the 'idle political nonsensical, thrashing off into nowhere, achieving absolutely nothing but posing dumb questions and time-wasting conversations, and filling the masses with irrelevant thoughts type' that I was referring to - and believe me my lovely, I won't be giving up my spas for that type anytime soon.
Enjoy your spa day.
I posted my comments in the Soapbox section. Do you understand that Soapbox is an open forum?
As my questions and curiosities do not live up to your standards of importance or significance, I cannot understand why you take up your precious time to reply. There are MANY other blog postings on this site that would serve your purpose to defend your beloved Obama. Truthfully, not that it’s your business, but I’m not a big fan of McCain either. I don’t believe that either party is the best choice available to run this country. As I’ve said in response to a politically-directed post on this site – I believe that if Americans were to do the primaries over again, we would likely have two very different majority party candidates on the ballot.
How can you say that your comments do not reveal a general distaste for American people? You wrote: “…the stupidity of a corrupt America...”, “…so many very small-minded and misled American people, those I can only call 'global village idiots'” and “a large following in America of conservatively-driven, small-minded, ill-informed and dangerously arrogant people.” Am I missing something between the lines here? Because, I’m not feeling a lot of international love and respect. Just because I, and almost half of America, do not back Obama for Presidency, does not make me a conservatively-driven, small-minded, ill-informed and dangerously arrogant person. The hypocrisy here is that such larger-than-life blanket statements demonstrate extreme ignorance and arrogance on your behalf.
And for the record, I fully understood your masturbation comment … to clarify for you, the manner of my response was meant to be considered sarcasm. Enjoy your spa day.