Look in he dictionay under "paranoid" and you'll find.......

[Little-Acorn]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...inting-Michelle-Obamas-hotel-room-around.html

Royal Navy ordered to turn ship's guns around - because they were pointing at Michelle Obama's hotel room

By Paul Bentley
Last updated at 3:36 PM on 15th October 2011

A British Royal Navy ship was ordered to turn its guns around because they were parked pointing at a hotel room Michelle Obama was staying in.
Fearing the First Lady might be in danger, minders ordered the captain of the HMS Edinburgh stationed in Cape Town, South Africa, to switch them away from her five-star suite.

The U.S. agents have since been accused of overreacting after it emerged the Sea Dart missiles were, in fact, loaded with blanks having been used during a ceremony in honour of a sailor who had died.

Former Royal Navy officer Mike Critchley told the Daily Mirror: 'This is typical American Secret Service going over the top.

'I would have thought that they could trust their British allies to not put a missile through the bedroom window of the First Lady. It is unfortunate that this happened at an extremely sad time for the ship.'

Mrs Obama was on an official visit to South Africa in June and was staying in a luxury suite at the five star Table Bay Hotel.

The boat, meanwhile, happened to be in the middle of a ceremonial routine to remember Lieutenant Sara Hellawell, a 26-year-old whose body was found onboard a few days before.

That did not stop the agents raging at them, saying: 'You can’t point those guns at the First Lady.'

 

[dogtowner]

I think the appropriate response would have been either

a) --click--
b) no, --click--
or
c) slag off, --click--

 

[Dr.Who]

The appropriate response would have been to turn the guns around and then withdraw all support from Britain to the US until a formal apology was received from the US to the Brits.

 

[Openmind]

The appropriate response would have been to turn the guns around and then withdraw all support from Britain to the US until a formal apology was received from the US to the Brits.

I think this whole story, once again, has been blown out of proportion in another attempt to make the First Lady look bad. . .although she probably was totally unaware that it even happen!

I don't think the British made a big fuss over it. . . . probably because if it had been the Queen in that hotel room, they would have acted pretty much the same way if the ship had been an US Navy ship!

But here is the worse thing that happened!

Describing the ceremony, a Navy spokesman said: 'This involved the drill missiles being on their launcher. American officials did visit the ship. They simply wanted to know if the missiles were live. When it was explained that they were drill rounds they went away content.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-Obamas-hotel-room-around.html#ixzz1axwJtdca

Now, can we go back to rationality and not make a "diplomatic incident" out of a silly little anecdote? When you think of the bashing Michelle Obama received in the past for daring to "break protocole" when she touched the Queen's shoulder in a friendly gesture. . .and again. . . ONLY the Obama basher in the US made a big deal of that "horrible infraction to protocole!"

Well, I would assume that a foreign country pointing (potentially) loaded guns to the window where ANY First lady (even the Queen) stays would be a "minor" infraction to any protocole!

 

[Dr.Who]

I think this whole story, once again, has been blown out of proportion in another attempt to make the First Lady look bad. . .although she probably was totally unaware that it even happen!

I don't think the British made a big fuss over it. . . . probably because if it had been the Queen in that hotel room, they would have acted pretty much the same way if the ship had been an US Navy ship!

But here is the worse thing that happened!



Now, can we go back to rationality and not make a "diplomatic incident" out of a silly little anecdote? When you think of the bashing Michelle Obama received in the past for daring to "break protocole" when she touched the Queen's shoulder in a friendly gesture. . .and again. . . ONLY the Obama basher in the US made a big deal of that "horrible infraction to protocole!"

Well, I would assume that a foreign country pointing (potentially) loaded guns to the window where ANY First lady (even the Queen) stays would be a "minor" infraction to any protocole!

I agree that people are trying to make the first lady look bad though in truth it is ONLY the secret service that overreacted.

The OP said that they were blanks so that shows no new light on it.

And the secret service did not merely walk away they did in fact ask that the guns be turned around.

According to the Op, again, the Brits did indeed make a fuss over it.

 

[Openmind]

I agree that people are trying to make the first lady look bad though in truth it is ONLY the secret service that overreacted.

The OP said that they were blanks so that shows no new light on it.

And the secret service did not merely walk away they did in fact ask that the guns be turned around.

According to the Op, again, the Brits did indeed make a fuss over it.

Actually, the "fuss" appeared to have been "made" after this new "hatred rampage" by OUR Right media in the US (obviously,under Murdoch's wings, both here and in the UK!).

And, how did the secret service know, before the inspection, that the guns were loaded with blanks? Should the secret service just "assume?" Or should they check?

 

[Dr.Who]

Actually, the "fuss" appeared to have been "made" after this new "hatred rampage" by OUR Right media in the US (obviously,under Murdoch's wings, both here and in the UK!).

Can you support that?

I see quotes from people abord the ship. I don't see any timelines.

And, how did the secret service know, before the inspection, that the guns were loaded with blanks? Should the secret service just "assume?" Or should they check?

They did n't. Why did they need to know that an allied ship carried blanks or not? If it is not standard procedure for a ship to point guns out to sea then this would be no different than any other time a brit ship parked with guns pointing inland.

If the guns had been pointed out to sea how long would it take for the crew to point them inland? Maybe 30 seconds? How long would it take them to reload with live ammo? maybe 1 minute? The first lady is safer by a grand total of 1 min and 30 seconds.

But the taxpayers paid for the secret service to go down to the ship and insult the brits.

 

[Openmind]

Can you support that?

I see quotes from people abord the ship. I don't see any timelines.


They did n't. Why did they need to know that an allied ship carried blanks or not? If it is not standard procedure for a ship to point guns out to sea then this would be no different than any other time a brit ship parked with guns pointing inland.

If the guns had been pointed out to sea how long would it take for the crew to point them inland? Maybe 30 seconds? How long would it take them to reload with live ammo? maybe 1 minute? The first lady is safer by a grand total of 1 min and 30 seconds.

But the taxpayers paid for the secret service to go down to the ship and insult the brits.

If this was an "insult to the Brits," the power that be sure didn't act like it! In fact, that incident took place on June 24th, and it is only in the last 3 days that it came out in the open. . .if it had been a "diplomatic incident," don't you think it would have come up a little faster than 15 weeks later?

Oh. . .and I guess the tax payers paid more for the secret service that was obviously already in place to take a little ride on the ship than they would have if the same secret service would have stayed in the hotel lobby sipping lemonade, right?

And. . .if it takes only 30 seconds to change the direction of the guns. . .what's the big deal? That means it took 30 seconds to change them from pointing toward the hotel, to pointing toward the sea! Big F. . .deal!

And may I remind you that it several of the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia. . .our great ally!

You are grasping at straws, trying to defend what amounts to (you said it yourself) a ridiculous attack on our First Lady .. .who had NOTHING to do with the whole incident!

It is very unlike you to be reach that low!

 

[dogtowner]

Oh. . .and I guess the tax payers paid more for the secret service that was obviously already in place to take a little ride on the ship than they would have if the same secret service would have stayed in the hotel lobby sipping lemonade, right?

could have been accomplished with phone calls

And. . .if it takes only 30 seconds to change the direction of the guns. . .what's the big deal? That means it took 30 seconds to change them from pointing toward the hotel, to pointing toward the sea! Big F. . .deal!

And may I remind you that it several of the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia. . .our great ally!

The relationship with the United Kingdom is far more longstanding. The issue is one of of needlessness.

You are grasping at straws, trying to defend what amounts to (you said it yourself) a ridiculous attack on our First Lady .. .who had NOTHING to do with the whole incident!

proof or opinion ?

It is very unlike you to be reach that low!

Maybe your picture is replacing michelle ?

 

[Dr.Who]

If this was an "insult to the Brits," the power that be sure didn't act like it! In fact, that incident took place on June 24th, and it is only in the last 3 days that it came out in the open. . .if it had been a "diplomatic incident," don't you think it would have come up a little faster than 15 weeks later?

Oh. . .and I guess the tax payers paid more for the secret service that was obviously already in place to take a little ride on the ship than they would have if the same secret service would have stayed in the hotel lobby sipping lemonade, right?

And. . .if it takes only 30 seconds to change the direction of the guns. . .what's the big deal? That means it took 30 seconds to change them from pointing toward the hotel, to pointing toward the sea! Big F. . .deal!

And may I remind you that it several of the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia. . .our great ally!

You are grasping at straws, trying to defend what amounts to (you said it yourself) a ridiculous attack on our First Lady .. .who had NOTHING to do with the whole incident!

It is very unlike you to be reach that low!

Really? This is from June? I missed that. Unless there was some delay due to FOIA or something then I would have to agree that this is most likely all political. See how easy it is to admit when one seems to be wrong?

 

[Openmind]

Really? This is from June? I missed that. Unless there was some delay due to FOIA or something then I would have to agree that this is most likely all political. See how easy it is to admit when one seems to be wrong?

Thank you, once again, for your sense of fairness.

Yes, that "incident did happen on June 24th 2011.

And I don't think there is any "wrong" in making an honest mistake.