US to spend 200 million a day on Obama's family vacation?

[Army of GOD]

Fucking jews


(I'm subbing in for BBS so it's ok for me to say that)


Fucking catholics

[ViperOverLord]

I'm hearing reports of 3,000 security agents / $200 mil on TV so it appears to be true. I guess Obama believes in waste in everything he does.

[2dimes]

I'm kind of against the idea of paying for journalists. It could totally pay off though. You never know when some dude is going to throw a shoe at him or something cool. You want enough people filming him to catch things like that, if they happen by chance.

[jonesthecurl]

what is the thing Obama is going to see? the festival of lights? what is it called...

Diwali?

[GabonX]

And how much do we spend per day on security, etc when he stays at home?

So you think that his security detail would be more lax when he's in a foreign country?

No, I think that its not 200 million extra. His personnal detail, follows the man. I also think heavy security is rather a necessity for any president. It has to do with representing our country.

That said, it is a lot of money. And, I do wish we could cut back on it.

He could just not go to Mumbai seeing as it's completely unnecessary and we live in the age of information and communication..

Instead this is happening:

34 warships sent from US for Obama visit

New Delhi: The White House will, of course, stay in Washington but the heart of the famous building will move to India when President Barack Obama lands in Mumbai on Saturday.

Communications set-up, nuclear button, a fleet of limousines and majority of the White House staff will be in India accompanying the President on this three-day visit that will cover Mumbai and Delhi.

He will also be protected by a fleet of 34 warships, including an aircraft carrier, which will patrol the sea lanes off the Mumbai coast during his two-day stay there beginning Saturday. The measure has been taken as Mumbai attack in 2008 took place from the sea.

Arrangements have been put in place for emergency evacuation, if needed.

Obama is expected to fly by a helicopter -- Marine One -- from the city airport to the Indian Navy's helibase INS Shikra at Colaba in south Mumbai.

From there, he will drive down in Lincoln Continental -- the Presidential limousine -- to the nearby the Taj Hotel.

Two jets, armed with advanced communication and security systems, and a fleet of over 40 cars will be part of Obamas convoy.

Around 800 rooms have been booked for the President and his entourage in Taj Hotel and Hyatt.

The President will have a security ring of American elite Secret Service, which are tasked to guard the President, along with National Security Guards (NSG) and personnel from central paramilitary forces and local police in Mumbai and Delhi.

Similar arrangements will be in place in Delhi, with the Air Force One to be kept in all readiness throughout Obama's stay here from Sunday afternoon to Tuesday morning.

Maurya Hotel, where the President will stay, has already been swarmed by American security personnel and protective measures have been put in place.

Security drills are already been carried out at the hotel as well as Rajghat which he will visit.

Sources said 13 heavy-lift aircraft with high-tech equipment, three helicopters and 500 US security personnel have arrived in India ahead of Obama's visit.

The US security has also brought interception and obstruction device, sniffer dogs, rescue gadgets.

Apart from Obama's Air Force One, a few private luxury jets carrying top American corporate leaders, who are part of Obama entourage, are also expected to arrive in India in next 2-3 days.

All high-rise buildings in the vicinity of Mumbai's Taj Mahal hotel and Delhi's Maurya Sheraton hotel, where the US President will stay, are being sanitised and security personnel will be positioned on rooftops to prevent any air-borne attack.

The Ridge area - opposite Delhi's Maurya Sheraton hotel - has been illuminated by floodlights as part of the heightened security drill.

The Home Ministry has already issued an alert for Mumbai and Delhi asking authorities to take extra precautions during Obama's visit as well as on Diwali on Friday.

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/34-wa ... isit-64459

Barack Obama's trip to India next month will be the biggest by any US President - with a staggering 40 aircraft and six armoured cars.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldne ... -cars.html

This trip is probably going to cause the release of more carbon dioxide than any of us will in a lifetime.. lulz

[spurgistan]

This story is notable in that it has little to no basis in fact. The details of state visits are highly guarded these days for security reasons, and the rumor that Obama is blowing fat stacks here stem from a quote from an anonymous Indian official in an Indian newspaper.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/india.asp

Granted, given that it's critical of the Obama administration, it's assumed that random Indian state officials are intimately familiar with the details of Obama's visit to the G20. Which, I gotta say, is one lame vacation.

[Incandenza]

Funfact: 200 million dollars/day is about what we're spending in Afghanistan. So unless Obama is bringing along a couple hundred thousand troops and assorted logistical and support personnel, I think we can all say with confidence that this story is complete and unmitigated bullshit. My god, some people will believe any old retarded thing just as long as it's something negative about the seekrit mooslin soshulist.

[Phatscotty]

Funfact: 200 million dollars/day is about what we're spending in Afghanistan. So unless Obama is bringing along a couple hundred thousand troops and assorted logistical and support personnel, I think we can all say with confidence that this story is complete and unmitigated bullshit. My god, some people will believe any old retarded thing just as long as it's something negative about the seekrit mooslin soshulist.

34 war-ships has to count for something. and the 3,000 # is not security, it's just the total amount of people. I'm guessing the chef and assistant chef, tailor, spiritual advisor...all count

[Timminz]

Fucking jews

Fucking catholics

In my experience, the latter is more fun.

[ViperOverLord]

I'm kind of against the idea of paying for journalists. It could totally pay off though. You never know when some dude is going to throw a shoe at him or something cool. You want enough people filming him to catch things like that, if they happen by chance.

It's a conflict of interest to fund journalism.

[Woodruff]

I'm kind of against the idea of paying for journalists. It could totally pay off though. You never know when some dude is going to throw a shoe at him or something cool. You want enough people filming him to catch things like that, if they happen by chance.

It's a conflict of interest to fund journalism.

It's also not even remotely a new thing.

[ViperOverLord]

I'm kind of against the idea of paying for journalists. It could totally pay off though. You never know when some dude is going to throw a shoe at him or something cool. You want enough people filming him to catch things like that, if they happen by chance.

It's a conflict of interest to fund journalism.

It's also not even remotely a new thing.

If you are talking about PBS or whatever then I agree. But if we're talking about executive branch funded journalism then it's new to me.

[Woodruff]

I'm kind of against the idea of paying for journalists. It could totally pay off though. You never know when some dude is going to throw a shoe at him or something cool. You want enough people filming him to catch things like that, if they happen by chance.

It's a conflict of interest to fund journalism.

It's also not even remotely a new thing.

If you are talking about PBS or whatever then I agree. But if we're talking about executive branch funded journalism then it's new to me.

Reporters have been flying on Air Force One since at least Reagan's time, and I'm quite certain they were doing so prior to then.

[ViperOverLord]

I'm kind of against the idea of paying for journalists. It could totally pay off though. You never know when some dude is going to throw a shoe at him or something cool. You want enough people filming him to catch things like that, if they happen by chance.

It's a conflict of interest to fund journalism.

It's also not even remotely a new thing.

If you are talking about PBS or whatever then I agree. But if we're talking about executive branch funded journalism then it's new to me.

Reporters have been flying on Air Force One since at least Reagan's time, and I'm quite certain they were doing so prior to then.

That's incidental benefits as obviously one has to be on the plane to talk face to face with the president. I'm talking about bankrolling operations.

[Woodruff]

It's a conflict of interest to fund journalism.

It's also not even remotely a new thing.

If you are talking about PBS or whatever then I agree. But if we're talking about executive branch funded journalism then it's new to me.

Reporters have been flying on Air Force One since at least Reagan's time, and I'm quite certain they were doing so prior to then.

That's incidental benefits as obviously one has to be on the plane to talk face to face with the president. I'm talking about bankrolling operations.

So it's not a conflict of interest then?

[ViperOverLord]

^^

It's an inherent conflict of interest at best. It's like discrediting a reporter for conducting an interview with a sports owner in his/her suite. And in the professional world of journalism, that is not considered a conflict of interest. Taking a drink from the owner could/would be. The same thing applies here. And let's not get too far away from the point that it is not at all the same thing as getting bankrolled, which is absolutely a serious conflict of interest.

[Woodruff]

^^

It's an inherent conflict of interest at best. It's like discrediting a reporter for conducting an interview with a sports owner in his/her suite. And in the professional world of journalism, that is not considered a conflict of interest. Taking a drink from the owner could/would be. The same thing applies here. And let's not get too far away from the point that it is not at all the same thing as getting bankrolled, which is absolutely a serious conflict of interest.

Then that's what you should have said. I agree with you.

[ViperOverLord]

^^

It's an inherent conflict of interest at best. It's like discrediting a reporter for conducting an interview with a sports owner in his/her suite. And in the professional world of journalism, that is not considered a conflict of interest. Taking a drink from the owner could/would be. The same thing applies here. And let's not get too far away from the point that it is not at all the same thing as getting bankrolled, which is absolutely a serious conflict of interest.

Then that's what you should have said. I agree with you.

This was always the implication. You are the one that brought up other factors. But I am happy to clear it up for you all the same.

[porkenbeans]

Funfact: 200 million dollars/day is about what we're spending in Afghanistan. So unless Obama is bringing along a couple hundred thousand troops and assorted logistical and support personnel, I think we can all say with confidence that this story is complete and unmitigated bullshit. My god, some people will believe any old retarded thing just as long as it's something negative about the seekrit mooslin soshulist.

Yes quite right. These numbers are reached, through the art of "fuzzy math". Every person that is being paid for their part in this security detail are already on the payroll, and would receive their paychecks, no matter where they are stationed on any particular day. Same goes for all the ships and planes. Just because a ship is part of the security for this event, does NOT mean that it is an "EXTRA" expense. The cost for that ship will be the same no matter where it is on any given day. To lump all of these things together, and present them as a "cost" for our Presidents vacation, ...is laughable.

[Phatscotty]

Funfact: 200 million dollars/day is about what we're spending in Afghanistan. So unless Obama is bringing along a couple hundred thousand troops and assorted logistical and support personnel, I think we can all say with confidence that this story is complete and unmitigated bullshit. My god, some people will believe any old retarded thing just as long as it's something negative about the seekrit mooslin soshulist.

Yes quite right. These numbers are reached, through the art of "fuzzy math". Every person that is being paid for their part in this security detail are already on the payroll, and would receive their paychecks, no matter where they are stationed on any particular day. Same goes for all the ships and planes. Just because a ship is part of the security for this event, does NOT mean that it is an "EXTRA" expense. The cost for that ship will be the same no matter where it is on any given day. To lump all of these things together, and present them as a "cost" for our Presidents vacation, ...is laughable.

I think Obama is bringing more war-ships to view the festival of lights than FDR did when he "viewed" Stalin and Churchill.

Wreaks of profligacy...

[Woodruff]

Funfact: 200 million dollars/day is about what we're spending in Afghanistan. So unless Obama is bringing along a couple hundred thousand troops and assorted logistical and support personnel, I think we can all say with confidence that this story is complete and unmitigated bullshit. My god, some people will believe any old retarded thing just as long as it's something negative about the seekrit mooslin soshulist.

Yes quite right. These numbers are reached, through the art of "fuzzy math". Every person that is being paid for their part in this security detail are already on the payroll, and would receive their paychecks, no matter where they are stationed on any particular day. Same goes for all the ships and planes. Just because a ship is part of the security for this event, does NOT mean that it is an "EXTRA" expense. The cost for that ship will be the same no matter where it is on any given day. To lump all of these things together, and present them as a "cost" for our Presidents vacation, ...is laughable.

I think Obama is bringing more war-ships to view the festival of lights than FDR did when he "viewed" Stalin and Churchill.

Wreaks of profligacy...

Do we have any proof of those warship numbers? I ask because that seems like a significant security breach, to me.

[ViperOverLord]

Funfact: 200 million dollars/day is about what we're spending in Afghanistan. So unless Obama is bringing along a couple hundred thousand troops and assorted logistical and support personnel, I think we can all say with confidence that this story is complete and unmitigated bullshit. My god, some people will believe any old retarded thing just as long as it's something negative about the seekrit mooslin soshulist.

Yes quite right. These numbers are reached, through the art of "fuzzy math". Every person that is being paid for their part in this security detail are already on the payroll, and would receive their paychecks, no matter where they are stationed on any particular day. Same goes for all the ships and planes. Just because a ship is part of the security for this event, does NOT mean that it is an "EXTRA" expense. The cost for that ship will be the same no matter where it is on any given day. To lump all of these things together, and present them as a "cost" for our Presidents vacation, ...is laughable.

I think Obama is bringing more war-ships to view the festival of lights than FDR did when he "viewed" Stalin and Churchill.

Wreaks of profligacy...

Do we have any proof of those warship numbers? I ask because that seems like a significant security breach, to me.

I think someone already posted it somewhere on CC. The article said 34 warships and 40 car motorcade for his entourage. I don't know that it's a security breach, but it does seem ridiculously excessive. This whole thing seems ridiculously excessive for that matter.

[Woodruff]

Funfact: 200 million dollars/day is about what we're spending in Afghanistan. So unless Obama is bringing along a couple hundred thousand troops and assorted logistical and support personnel, I think we can all say with confidence that this story is complete and unmitigated bullshit. My god, some people will believe any old retarded thing just as long as it's something negative about the seekrit mooslin soshulist.

Yes quite right. These numbers are reached, through the art of "fuzzy math". Every person that is being paid for their part in this security detail are already on the payroll, and would receive their paychecks, no matter where they are stationed on any particular day. Same goes for all the ships and planes. Just because a ship is part of the security for this event, does NOT mean that it is an "EXTRA" expense. The cost for that ship will be the same no matter where it is on any given day. To lump all of these things together, and present them as a "cost" for our Presidents vacation, ...is laughable.

I think Obama is bringing more war-ships to view the festival of lights than FDR did when he "viewed" Stalin and Churchill.

Wreaks of profligacy...

Do we have any proof of those warship numbers? I ask because that seems like a significant security breach, to me.

I think someone already posted it somewhere on CC. The article said 34 warships and 40 car motorcade for his entourage.

Do we have a cite other than an Indian newspaper that doesn't cite anything itself? Or is that enough, since you don't like Obama?

I don't know that it's a security breach

Military movements are considered classified information. That this would involve the President would certainly seem to heighten that security level.

[Phatscotty]

not if the military is going to see the festival of lights tho

[Woodruff]

not if the military is going to see the festival of lights tho

Of course, because if it gives Phatscotty the opportunity to attack the President, it couldn't POSSIBLY be a security problem.