US pays $400 per gallon for gas in Afghanistan

[Beanstalk]

Hi Jack,

I don't want to play with you. I'm calling it the way I see it-

1) Someone posts an article about the cost of gas being $400 (not the price we pay but what it costs us to get it to Afghanistan).

2) Jack posts in the thread that he knows for "fact" that we don't really pay $400 per gallon and that he has first hand knowledge of this

3) Posters ask Jack to share with us how he knows the article is false

4) Instead of sharing his sources Jack repeats over and over again that he knows for "fact" that we don't really pay $400 per gallon and that he has first hand knowledge of this

5) Jack expresses frustration that he needs to repeat himself

6) Jack starts throwing around insults and using sarcasm when he is called on all of this

I think my reading comprehension skill level is pretty high so let me know if this isn't what we see here

Geo,

Good to know you don't want to play with me. The point is you and several others want answers but are unwilling to do anything to get them. A little effort with all the tools we have today to find information and people still want the problem solved for them by someone else. Here Geo, Not the end Not all the answers but a place if you seriously are interested (Which I Doubt) do some further research find the answers for yourself. Interesting how it is the same same posters from thread to thread. Please step up Geo, You pointed fingers, now lets see what you know? What do you offer this thread? Come young man.. Its not at your local Wal-Mart...


http://rawstory.com/2009/10/bryan-whitman-2/



In Part I of this series, Raw Story revealed that Bryan Whitman, the current deputy assistant secretary of defense for media operations, was an active senior participant in a Bush administration covert Pentagon program that used retired military analysts to generate positive wartime news coverage.

This is what 1st hand knowledge means. I know as a fact what this was about. Hope this answers your question Geo.

I had hoped someone else would have figured out what this and many other stories we have been told in the past. I was a part of this program for 7 years. Some of what has been told is not what really happened. I know, I was there. I retired last year and bought a place in sowal. I still have my place in Atlanta and own a business (Media) in Mississippi.

Jack

 

[Geo]

Hi Jack,

I think you just said the reason you know that the article is false is because you worked for the government helping to influence the media to say positive and sometimes untrue things.

But I'm not entirely sure because a lot of what you write is really hard to follow. Plus- I'm also distracted by the condescension in your posts.

No disrespect intended but here is a big hint for you-
when people on message boards ask you to support YOUR statements, it isn't because they are too lazy to do research on the subject. And it isn't because they are younger than you or not as smart or informed as you.

 

[Beanstalk]

Hi Jack,

I think you just said the reason you know that the article is false is because you worked for the government helping to influence the media to say positive and sometimes untrue things.

But I'm not entirely sure because a lot of what you write is really hard to follow. Plus- I'm also distracted by the condescension in your posts.

No disrespect intended but here is a big hint for you-
when people on message boards ask you to support YOUR statements, it isn't because they are too lazy to do research on the subject. And it isn't because they are younger than you or not as smart or informed as you.

Hint? Geo, when does a thread about a titled subject such as this become about a poster. My point is very clear. You as well as a few others stray away from the FACTS of the original post and ATTACK another posters creditability because this poster says he/she knows something to be untrue. Instead of offering facts about the article you attack the poster. Seems we have a circle here of pointing fingers. The fact is YES I have 1st hand knowledge of this subject. I also stated I know these publishers to be biased. I suggest that if you wish to become fully aware and be able to FOLLOW read ALL the post. Not just a couple. Comprehension is being able to take everything in and understanding what was said or written. I find this thread as many here to be a turkey shoot for a handful of childish egocentric individuals.

Clear this up for you and a few others. Before one post on a subject know a little something about the what is being discussed so you learn from these message boards.

Geo I still await to see what you have to offer on this subject" US pays $400 per gallon for gas in Afghanistan ". We have now cleared up my understanding of FACTS, what do you bring here other then an attempt to look good before the groupies? These are what we in the media call "Drive By" postings. No knowldge on subject matter, Just Gang like mentality with same motive of operation. I am pretty well done here with this group of wanna be blog gang bangers.


Hint, if you want to learn something, the best way to do so is to put personal effort in to obtain the facts yourself. Do your own homework, stop taking the easy way out and expect someone else to do it for you. Also give a poster room. He/She might be able to help you find information if they are shown a willingness from others that they too want to learn. The rule of posting here appears to be start a subject with no background and toss it out there to look like you know what you sharing. In this case you found someone who lived it daily for 7 plus years. Instead of learning from the experience some are more interested in Blog relations. Myself, I see this as the same pattern of generation Y,
Generation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Point in case, Had you or others used Private communication that is available on this site to question my FACTS instead of using the thread as their soap box to show the world they are smarter because they take a Drive By at a poster, this would have been proper etiquette as someone was so willing to post publicly a link. Again proof they never read or comprehended the very link they stood on as fact. I could go on but even though I have retired I still work. Off to Mississippi this week. Bottom line Geo... Use the thread to discuss FACTS about the thread, Not a turkey shoot to look good in front of the groupies. At least look and show some intelligence on ones self. Now hopefully the subject at hand will be discussed and others can learn. Feel free to start a thread about me if you wish to discuss me. Thanks for your input and your concerns. Good Day,
Jack

 

[Lynnie]

Well, we have raw story and the hill both posted by astute sowallers and both articles explain the cost to keep tankers, etc. fueled in Afghanistan.

Googled: US pays $400 per gallon of gas in Afghanistan and received the following links.

Search Results

1. <LI class=g>US pays $400 per gallon for gas in Afghanistan | Raw Story
   
   Oct 16, 2009 ... US pays $400 per gallon for gas in Afghanistan. By John Byrne ..... and I certainly don't want to spend it listening to your drivel all day. ...
   rawstory.com/.../us-pays-400-per-gallon-for-gas-in-afghanistan/ - Cached - Similar
   <LI class=g>Gasoline in Afghanistan Costs the U.S. $400 Per Gallon - Topix
   
   2 posts - 2 authors
   Gasoline in Afghanistan Costs the U.S. $400 Per Gallon. Full story: snafu-ed.blogspot.com. Shades of those old stories of wasteful spending on nuts and ...
   www.topix.com/forum/pk/karachi/T47951OV2CUNVJ5V6 - Cached - Similar
   <LI class=g style="MARGIN-LEFT: 3em">Gasoline in Afghanistan Costs the U.S. $400 Per Gallon - Topix
   
   21 posts - 13 authors - Last post: Oct 16
   Shades of those old stories of wasteful spending on nuts and bolts! ... that the U.S. spends $400 per gallon for gasoline in Afghanistan. ...
   www.topix.com/us/.../gasoline-in-afghanistan-costs-the-u-s-400-per-gallon - Cached - Similar
   Show more results from www.topix.com
   
   
   
   <LI class=g>SNAFU-ed .... Situation Normal: Gasoline in Afghanistan Costs the ...
   
   Oct 16, 2009 ... Gasoline in Afghanistan Costs the U.S. $400 Per Gallon. Shades of those old stories of wasteful spending on nuts and bolts! ...
   snafu-ed.blogspot.com/.../afghanistan-gasoline-costs-us-400-per.html - Cached - Similar
   <LI class=g>$400 per gallon gas to drive debate over cost of war in ...
   
   Oct 16, 2009 ... The top U.S. general in Afghanistan, Stanley McChrystal, reportedly has ... The $400 per gallon reflects what in Pentagon parlance is known as the .... So we've spent a few trillion in the past 7 years rearranging rubble ...
   thehill.com/.../63407-400gallon-gas-another-cost-of-war-in-afghanistan-?... - Cached - Similar
   <LI class=g>US pays $400 per gallon for gas in Afghanistan, page 1
   
   20 posts - 11 authors
   Discusion about US pays $400 per gallon for gas in Afghanistan in the ... requests for funds with the $636 billion spending bill that the Senate passed. ...
   www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread511229/pg1 - Cached - Similar
   <LI class=g>US pays $400 per gallon for gas in Afghanistan - SoWal Beaches Forum
   
   62 posts - 14 authors
   US pays $400 per gallon for gas in Afghanistan | Raw Story Last year, ... Don't the teabaggers keep saying they are so worried about spending, the debt, ...
   www.sowal.com/.../41613-us-pays-400-per-gallon-gas-afghanistan.html - Cached - Similar
   <LI class=g>Silobreaker: US pays $400 per gallon for gas in Afghanistan
   
   US spending 400 dollars for a gallon of gas for... - Sify [10/18/2009] .... US pays $400 per gallon for gas in Afghanistan [Raw Story - 10/16/2009] ...
   www.silobreaker.com/us-pays-400-per-gallon-for-gas-in-afghanistan-5_2262678405352783879 - Cached - Similar
   <LI class=g>US Pays $400 Per Gallon for Gas in Afghanistan | Drudge Retort
   
   Oct 23, 2009 ... US Pays $400 Per Gallon for Gas in Afghanistan (61 comments) . ..... I just spent the whole day looking for a $10 heat sensor for my Ford ...
   www.drudge.com/news/126314/us-pays-400-per-gallon-gas - Cached - Similar
2. US pays $400 per gallon for gas in Afghanistan | DoomDaily
   
   US pays $400 per gallon for gas in Afghanistan 071009banner3 ... UK.gov backs ID scheme with peanuts promo spend ? White House met secretly with corporate ...
   www.doomdaily.com/.../us-pays-400-per-gallon-for-gas-in-afghanistan/ - Cached - Similar

I don't have time to click on each of these, but agree with Geo and others, Jack. If you have info. that can further explain, please post as I think we are all interested in the bottom line currently. Just with my quick search, I am not finding anything negating the story, which will be debated before Congress.

Enjoy your week in MS! Let us know how much the gas/gal. is there.

 

[Alicia Leonard]

 

[Geo]

I already told you that I don't want to play with you. This is my last attempt to right things with you.

You asked me what my contribution has been to this thread. Kindly refer to Posts 52 and 59.

In Post 52, I attempted to clarify that the $400 per gallon figure is completely plausible because it represents the total cost of getting the gas to Afghanistan (rather than the price of just the gas itself). I see this as being pretty important so that we are all on the same page.

In Post 59, I tried to point out to you that you aren't being attacked but rather- folks are calling you out for advancing a contradictory position to the article and declaring what you say to be "fact" and "firsthand knowledge" without citing your sources despite numerous requests from other posters. In addition, I pointed out to you (in response to your own complaints about repeating your points) that we aren't any happier about you repeating yourself than you are. Is this a contribution? I believe it is. It was an attempt to bridge the gap between the person who claims the article is false and the folks who want to understand if it is false and why.

Just for fun- here is an example of the way this thread *could* have played itself out.

JACK: The article isn't true. I know this for fact. I have firsthand knowledge of this.

OTHER SOWALLERS: Really? Do tell?

JACK: I worked for the last 7 years for a government organization that used the media for PR purposes. My job was X, Y, Z and here is what I learned, from whom, etc, etc. In conclusion, this supports my point that the article is completely false.

OTHER SOWALLERS: Wow- we are lucky to have you as a source. Thanks for sharing. Keep posting!

(Instead you just kept declaring your words to be facts and ignored requests for you to cite sources to back up your statements and got kind of snarky to folks).
***********************

Jack,
If you are interested in exchanging ideas with me I would respectfully request that you drop the condescending attitude and cease to name call. If you are unwilling or incapable of doing this then I will be forced to hit the IGNORE button, which I don't want to do because then I would miss out on your insight (no saracasm intended).

I will follow your lead, Jack. Show some respect and you will get it back. Otherwise I am disengaging.

 

[poppy]

Beanstalk, I don't believe you have any inside knowledge about anything, in fact I believe you're full of crap. Now get off your lazy butt and search the internet to prove me wrong!

 

[sunspotbaby]

:funn: (when i quote you, it says wacko: wacko: wacko

 

[Geo]

Beanstalk, I don't believe you have any inside knowledge about anything, in fact I believe you're full of crap. Now get off your lazy butt and search the internet to prove me wrong!

 

[Lynnie]

Maybe the info. is Classified?