Marines with no live ammo

Are you talking about the US Embassy in Cairo? As far as I know, the Embassy was stormed not bombed.

Here is the website that was spreading the rumor created by some third party blog, and then note their update which is essentially a retraction except that it did not make it to the headline:

Updates: Pentagon spokesman George Little told Time magazine Thursday: "With or without a weapon, Marines are always armed.I've heard nothing to suggest they don't have ammunition." Additionally, per Time, the Marine Corps said in a statement late Thursday that any reports "of Marines not being able to have their weapons loaded per direction from the ambassador are not accurate."

The original blog cited by the Blaze mentions USMC blogs as the source of this rumor, but does give any links or say what blogs they were. Why are people so gullible as to believe such questionable bullshit? Why does the Blaze not fact check before putting huge headlines on the internet. Did you know even the Pennysaver has a fact checker? Its a position held by my friend's mother.

The guy on the radio did say the source was blogs, by US Marine troops. In my case, it sounded just about like something a gun hating bunch of sixties protest marchers would do to the Marines.

Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus

Are you talking about the US Embassy in Cairo? As far as I know, the Embassy was stormed not bombed.

Here is the website that was spreading the rumor created by some third party blog, and then note their update which is essentially a retraction except that it did not make it to the headline:

Updates: Pentagon spokesman George Little told Time magazine Thursday: "With or without a weapon, Marines are always armed.I've heard nothing to suggest they don't have ammunition." Additionally, per Time, the Marine Corps said in a statement late Thursday that any reports "of Marines not being able to have their weapons loaded per direction from the ambassador are not accurate."

The original blog cited by the Blaze mentions USMC blogs as the source of this rumor, but does give any links or say what blogs they were. Why are people so gullible as to believe such questionable bullshit? Why does the Blaze not fact check before putting huge headlines on the internet. Did you know even the Pennysaver has a fact checker? Its a position held by my friend's mother.

And of course that is why such propaganda works. It plays on the presumed stereotype views of its target audience. Because it "sounded just about like something" you think would have happened, you are ready to believe it did happen even though somebody just made it up.

I have not seen anyone talking about this on the internet that gives any link to these unammed blogs that were supposedly the source of the rumor.

I am sure after the lesson of Beruit in 1983, anyone giving such an order would be in deep trouble.

An amusing study about why we seem to refuse to face facts...

Here?s the delicious irony of this post: Some of you will disagree with the content. Strongly. Vehemently. Passionately.

Angrily.

You are wrong, according to the facts. Yet you maintain a death-grip mental hold on some untrue myths. And you refuse to surrender your unshakable belief ? even when evidence is presented to the contrary. Why? Well, it?s basically how our brains work when it comes to persuasive urban legends and fabrications that perfectly suit our worldviews, according to a new report published in Psychological Science in the Public Interest, a journal for the Association for Psychological Science. Simply put: it?s cognitively easier for our minds to trust a lie ? if it supports our deepest convictions ? than it is to reject information that requires some mental sweat to assess.

The report, which explains why some pieces of misinformation are so ?sticky,? was authored by a cognitive scientist and three psychology professors.

(snipped some)

Her research has shown that unless you can give people an alternative fact ?that fills that causal hole,? they will cling to the old belief.

(more)

And shame on you too, for interjecting logic into a perfectly good argument :-)

Mea culpa.

I apologies.

Too bad the Obamassiah tried to verify his "hawaiian birth" with a badly done fraudulent birth certificate.

Shrug

Gunner

More likely than not - and *you* certainly have no evidence to the contrary - his birth certificate is authentic.

But it is likely that he did exactly verify it and the bulk of the Demo's undoubtedly believed him. Just as Richard's quote tells us, they believed because that fits their preconceived notions better then the alternate.

Sure I do. There are about 250 actual experts plus the investigation department of a sheriffs agency in Arizona that claims it to be a fraudulent document

Works for me just fine. Afterall...it only takes 12 amateurs to sentence a man to death..and all those experts know their shit just fine.

But hey...believe what you want. Jim Jones and the Obamassiah...a pair that will go down in history together.

Gunner

Lol, gumbie has problems with certificates. Seem he doesn't have one to prove he was in Nam. despite continual claims/inferrences.

If they are real "experts", then they don't need 250 of them.

And that is going to be so authorative isn't it.

"Predeceived" notions.

Too bad that the Republican Party is such a bunch of incompetent idiots that they let someone not only run but beat them with a fake birth certificate. That is what you want us to believe, isn?t it?

As to the Sheriff, that is a county elected position and there is no requirement that the person running for that office actually be qualified to do the job. Just that he be popular enough to win the election.

And for the experts, any lawyer will tell you that he can come up with more than 250 of them that will say whatever he wants them to say in a court of law so your 250 don?t impress me much.

What would impress me is a rational reason why the Republican Party didn?t check his documentation before letting him beat them in the election.

Are you saying that the Republican Party is in the habit of not checking the documentation of people that they let into important political offices?

Gunner on Thu, 04 Oct 2012 05:59:03 -0700 typed in alt.survival the following:

I'm suppose to believe a document prepared by NBC "News"? After they get exposed for editing "news" footage to fit their narrative? Not hardly.

NBC - Democrat Operatives with by-lines.

If nothing else, the last four years have clarified that the "Main Stream Media" is not in the tank for the DNC - it is an integral part of the Democrat Party.

tschus pyotr

-- pyotr filipivich Most journalists these days couldn't investigate a missing chocolate cake at a pre-school without a Democrat office holder telling them what to look for, where, and why it is Geroge Bush's fault.

As we have just seen, that applies to Presidents too.

Rather a lot like Jim Jones's flock of dead followers. And the other bunch...the Heavens Gate folks.

Actually..the Obama Presidency is very reminiscent of the Jonestown bunch. They killed themselves and murdered many others

Gunner

It applies to almost all political offices. It is part of the reason that I think the system needs reworked.

Or 'National Biscut Company' :)