Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"McCain and Co would like us to believe that the Obama Administration is grossly incompetent at everything except concocting elaborate conspiracies which they pull off without a trace." --Michelle Blowers
"McCain and Co would like us to believe that the Obama Administration is grossly incompetent at everything except concocting elaborate conspiracies which they pull off without a trace." --Michelle Blowers
Your President stood and lied to your faces about this, four Americans are dead, and you're all OK with these actions.
Who sent the Ambassador to Benghazi with light security detail?
Probably the state department?
I know, you Fox News guys think Obama sat at a table and said "hey, this Stevens guy..he's expendable...just send him there with pocket knife, we don't care if he gets killed."
I know you guys buy all this Obama is the devil stuff, but stop for a second, let the anger go, and THINK.
"McCain and Co would like us to believe that the Obama Administration is grossly incompetent at everything except concocting elaborate conspiracies which they pull off without a trace." --Michelle Blowers
Pull off without a trace? Is that why this mess has been in the news for weeks now? Only a lib could believe that silliness.
OK, I put on my Obama 2016 button and see the light.
A bunch of Benghazians were watching CNN and listening to the radio, the Cairo protests came on, with nothing better to do, they took to the streets. A few of those folks, or some extremist folks who heard the demonstrators, got their weapons and attacked the consulate, and with extra ammo and an adreniline rush, the annex as well.
I now see that the preceding requests for added security were in anticipation of a spontaneous protest caused by protests in Cairo. I will understand that 'extremist' and 'terrorist' are synonymous. That protests in Cairo will cause protests in Benghazi.
So much more about this spinning out of control incident has become evident. Obama 2016 buttons do wonders.
No intelligence analyst produces a report or summary without first running it by the president? BS.
They produce reports all the time, but every day the President gets a written update from the FBI and CIA. EVERY. DAY.
The CIA (specifically Patraeus) said that they knew it was terrorism THAT day. A four star general under oath, and already in trouble isn't likely to lie under oath, so we can bet that it's true. For the next THREE WEEKS the President's staff, and yes, even Barry himself, said over and over and over that this was due to a video and NOT terrorism.
You're telling me that the reports were written, someone IMMEDIATELY and without permission scrubbed the terrorism part out and changed it and the President and their staff got the report and went with it, all the while totally oblivious to everything? Really?
Nobody takes a crap in the intelligence community without the administration knowing about it. Can they do it? Yes. Does everyone know about it? Yes.
What you've got is an administration that immediately went into damage control because the election was coming up and a lot of their campaign was based on him saying Al Qaeda was on the run and broken up. Couldn't have a new attack right before the election, could we.
And we've got 51% of Americans that are either too ignorant to see what's being sold to them, or don't have the morals and ethics to care that the leader of the free world is lying to their faces.
It's a sad time in America when folks start supporting this.
No, while wearing my Obama 2016 button I think as you do --- 'extremists' and 'terrorists' are synonymous.
Without the button, I realize that some extremists may also be terrorists, but most are either called 'extremists' by people who don't like their views or who actually do have positions on the very fringe of most opinion. This means referring to people as extremist isn't the same as saying they're terrorists or killers or folks.
They produce reports all the time, but every day the President gets a written update from the FBI and CIA. EVERY. DAY.
The CIA (specifically Patraeus) said that they knew it was terrorism THAT day. A four star general under oath, and already in trouble isn't likely to lie under oath, so we can bet that it's true. For the next THREE WEEKS the President's staff, and yes, even Barry himself, said over and over and over that this was due to a video and NOT terrorism.
You're telling me that the reports were written, someone IMMEDIATELY and without permission scrubbed the terrorism part out and changed it and the President and their staff got the report and went with it, all the while totally oblivious to everything? Really?
Nobody takes a crap in the intelligence community without the administration knowing about it. Can they do it? Yes. Does everyone know about it? Yes.
What you've got is an administration that immediately went into damage control because the election was coming up and a lot of their campaign was based on him saying Al Qaeda was on the run and broken up. Couldn't have a new attack right before the election, could we.
And we've got 51% of Americans that are either too ignorant to see what's being sold to them, or don't have the morals and ethics to care that the leader of the free world is lying to their faces.
It's a sad time in America when folks start supporting this.
You've got one American here who thinks that despite that fact that I don't like the admin lying about Benghazi, I'm well aware of the fact that this incident would have been used as a political football by the Romney camapaign and their media apparatus, and may have swayed the election. The consequences of that meant that I took Obama and his lying administration over a continuation of GOP failed policies, which for all intents and purposes Romney would have just reinstated....trickle down economics and an inevitable war with Iran being the parts that concerned me most. I don't think we should be involved in the Middle East period, and neither candidate held that viewpoint.
And again, Bush's lies resulted in many deaths and most of the people screaming about Benghazi supported him UNFLINCHINGLY, so most of the outrage about American deaths is pure partisan BS.
I know, you Fox News guys think Obama sat at a table and said "hey, this Stevens guy..he's expendable...just send him there with pocket knife, we don't care if he gets killed."
I know you guys buy all this Obama is the devil stuff, but stop for a second, let the anger go, and THINK.
Two things:
First: the second part of your "quote" appears nowhere in anything I wrote.
Second: Nobody said he sent him without protection. However, it's well documented that they requested more security after they were attacked earlier, and denied. They were in one of the most active terrorist areas and they got nothing.
Now, whether that was a strategic plan or not, we'll never know. None of us are security analysts.
However, what cannot be refuted is that your President took those horrible events that day and LIED about them for weeks because his election was coming up. There is more and more coming out saying he KNEW that day that it was terrorism. Yet they got up and lied about it. Lied to try and save the election.
To those that say "well it was a matter of national security" you know full well that the President could have gotten up and said "we're investigating the actions and will comment when we know all the facts" and most of the folks would have been fine with that response. But he didn't. He went into self preservation mode.
We've got two problems here. The way this was handled before/during, which there will always be Monday morning quarterbacking, and the way it was handled after. There is NO excuse for the President to lie about this. NONE. The problem is that all his followers lap everything up that he says and refuse to question him on anything.
There was a day in this country that the media (ALL the media) would stand up and ask tough questions to get the truth. Those days are gone. Now if someone stands up and asks for the truth, they're called biased against the President.
We should ALL demand the truth from our leaders, regardless of the party. But the morals of this country are dead. Politics before honor.
They produce reports all the time, but every day the President gets a written update from the FBI and CIA. EVERY. DAY.
The CIA (specifically Patraeus) said that they knew it was terrorism THAT day. A four star general under oath, and already in trouble isn't likely to lie under oath, so we can bet that it's true. For the next THREE WEEKS the President's staff, and yes, even Barry himself, said over and over and over that this was due to a video and NOT terrorism.
You're telling me that the reports were written, someone IMMEDIATELY and without permission scrubbed the terrorism part out and changed it and the President and their staff got the report and went with it, all the while totally oblivious to everything? Really?
Nobody takes a crap in the intelligence community without the administration knowing about it. Can they do it? Yes. Does everyone know about it? Yes.
What you've got is an administration that immediately went into damage control because the election was coming up and a lot of their campaign was based on him saying Al Qaeda was on the run and broken up. Couldn't have a new attack right before the election, could we.
And we've got 51% of Americans that are either too ignorant to see what's being sold to them, or don't have the morals and ethics to care that the leader of the free world is lying to their faces.
It's a sad time in America when folks start supporting this.
Still under oath Patraeus ALSO said there was conflicting intelligence coming in at first and some of that intelligence said the attack was sparked by the video. FOX news fans always leave that part out when reporting on the general's testimony. They also leave out the fact that he said the unclassified version was put out and read by Rice was to protect their intelligence sources in the ongoing and very new investigation. Why is that so hard to believe yet it's so easy to believe there was a massive coverup involved?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
