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.
It was not just a cover-up, by blaming this video (that nobody saw) instead of al Qaeda terrorists Obama caused even more unrest and anti-American hatred in more than a dozen other countries around the world.
Obama made a huge deal about this video and was acting like it was the video all along when they had a pretty good idea it was a terrorist attack. Not only that, but they were waving this video around telling the extremists all about it which lead to further riots in which people were killed. Plus, you had Obama giving speech to sooth the very people that he helped incite by virtually apologizing for free speech.
That isn't exactly reassuring in terms of his motive or competency.
I'm not saying this was an optimal execution of foreign policy on behalf of the Obama team, but the Libya attack is quickly becoming an over-politicized tragedy and little else, which is very inappropriate. Criticizing foreign policy is COMPLETELY fine, but to think this is a singular act of negligence that only Obama has transgressed, and will doom his legacy forever, is complete malarkey (I was using that word long before the debate, I'm Irish). Attacks like these have been happening for decades. Let's take a look at every comparable attack that happened during the previous administration.
June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.
February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Truck bomb kills 17.
February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.
July 30, 2004, U.S. embassy in Taskkent, Uzbekistan
Suicide bomber kills two.
December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.
March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomate directly targeted by the assailants.
September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria
Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb (though second truck bomb failed to detonate). One killed and 13 wounded.
January 12, 2007, U.S. embassy in Athens, Greece
A rocket-propelled grenade was fired at the embassy building. No one was injured.
July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.
March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls' school instead.
September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy with RPGs, rifles, grenades and car bombs. Six Yemeni soldiers and seven civilians were killed. Sixteen more were injured.
And then, there's 9/11, which occurred after intelligence informed Bush that Al-Queda was planning an imminent attack, a blunder he has yet to be punished for accordingly.
This is why History can be crucial -- it contextualizes things. I could probably find similar data for Clinton, or Reagan, anything as far back as the data will provide. History can also negate petty sensationalism, which is all to apparent here. Events like these are not to be exploited, like the way Bush exploited his own foreign policy disaster (or as Wolfowitz coined, today's Pearl Harbor) to lead us into a completely unrelated war. The Foreign policy debate should move on -- there are many issues that Obama deserves praise for some, and criticism for others. Let's keep this factual and informed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by git45
Again with the emoticons. Am I arguing with a teenager? You're really not worth the effort. Since none of the attacks that happened in the past weren't even exposed to us, let alone announcing it was an act of terror.
Emphasis mine.
You just destroyed your entire argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by git45
They were all covered up...
Well, wait a minute....you said we "weren't even exposed" to them.
Which is it?
And you're going to blame the Bush Administration for lying and attempting to cover up those incidents, when in fact they were highly reported and no one in the Bush Administration tried to cover them up by blaming it on a video?
Quote:
Originally Posted by git45
If Osama Bin Laden hadn't put out a Video the day after 9/11 saying "It was me! Bwahahahaha!!" Bush probably would have blamed it on Saddam Hussein, furthering a premeditated agenda that began with his father.
But bin Laden made no such video.
You're referring to the Fatty bin Laden video....which has been thoroughly debunked.
bin Laden was 6'6" tall -- the impostor in the video is not more than 5'10"
bin Laden barely weighs 165 lbs -- the impostor in the video is pushing 300 pounds.
bin Laden is left-handed -- the impostor in the video is clearly right-handed
bin Laden is a devout Sunni Muslim who never wore watches, necklaces or jewelry of any kind and a photo history of bin Laden since age 16 proves that -- the impostor in the video is heavily burdened and adorned with gold jewelry
bin Laden is an Arab and specifically a member of the Saud Tribe bearing all of the physical features of Arabs and of the Saud Tribe -- the impostor in the video was very obviously a Turco-Mongol.
Also, it would have been nice if you had credited....
Btw, is'nt the congress dominated by republicans and faux?
Time for some facts and put this to rest.
The Obama Administration requested $2.641 Billion for embassy security. The House proposed $2.311 Billion which was $330 Million less than the Administration requested. That would 12.49% less.
The Senate in a bi-partisan effort offered budget amendments that increase spending to $2.37 Billion which was $270 Million less, or 10.2% less than the Administration requested.
The cuts did not target any specific US diplomatic mission. Hillary as Secretary of State and responsible for administering and over-seeing the State Department's budget was free to spend money on embassy security as she saw fit. In addition to the money already available for embassy security, Hilliary could have taken money from any other programs in the State Department and used it to pay for security. She could have also asked for an emergency appropriations measure to provide more funding.
So, according to your differently twisted logic....if 199 Democrats in Congress vote to cut funding for embassy in security in general while 163 Republicans vote for it....
...the Republicans cut the budget....
...because we all know that 163 is greater than 199...
..right?
Yeah, whatever, you just hold onto that thought and cherish it.
Was the refusal to provide more security caused by budget cuts to embassy security? “No, sir,†Charlene Lamb, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Programs.
Of that you can be certain, but it's anyone's guess as to what exactly.
Perhaps the attack threatened to expose the Syrian (or Iranian) Slush Fund -- you know, diverting money from the State Department from one part of the budget to the budget of USAID or into black ops or something, or perhaps where the money goes is linked to al-Qaida in some way.
If true, that would explain a lot.
Speculating...
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentwoodgirl
Ironically, in disobeying the cowardly orders to not help, Tyrone Woods helped Obama. They were told to stand down, but Woods wouldn't do that with 30 people's lives on the line. He went to the consulate and saved those people. Obama should be honoring Woods for having the courage that Obama himself did not have.
Amen, sister.
Concurring....
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25
Blunder? It's a blunder that he knew terrorists attacked the embassy on the anniversary of 9-11 yet he stood there and chastised us for making anti muslim movies which was the cause?
YOu request well thought out arguments and you retort with nothing. Good luck.
I used a double negative. They weren't conveyed to the people at the time of those attacks. I have done nothing to negate my argument, other than the fact that I make typos.
Again with the insults people. All the children should be in bed by now.
Well lets see..............because it just happened and our CIC and sec of state lied about the entire thing. Maybe that is why??
It is much more than just the blatant lies of our government. By their deliberate deceit Obama, Hillary, and Rice fomented anti-American hatred, and countless other lives, in more than a dozen Muslim dominant countries around the world.
I'm not saying this was an optimal execution of foreign policy on behalf of the Obama team, but the Libya attack is quickly becoming an over-politicized tragedy and little else, which is very inappropriate. Criticizing foreign policy is COMPLETELY fine, but to think this is a singular act of negligence that only Obama has transgressed, and will doom his legacy forever, is complete malarkey (I was using that word long before the debate, I'm Irish). Attacks like these have been happening for decades. Let's take a look at every comparable attack that happened during the previous administration.
June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.
February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Truck bomb kills 17.
February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.
July 30, 2004, U.S. embassy in Taskkent, Uzbekistan
Suicide bomber kills two.
December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.
March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomate directly targeted by the assailants.
September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria
Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb (though second truck bomb failed to detonate). One killed and 13 wounded.
January 12, 2007, U.S. embassy in Athens, Greece
A rocket-propelled grenade was fired at the embassy building. No one was injured.
July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.
March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls' school instead.
September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy with RPGs, rifles, grenades and car bombs. Six Yemeni soldiers and seven civilians were killed. Sixteen more were injured.
And then, there's 9/11, which occurred after intelligence informed Bush that Al-Queda was planning an imminent attack, a blunder he has yet to be punished for accordingly.
This is why History can be crucial -- it contextualizes things. I could probably find similar data for Clinton, or Reagan, anything as far back as the data will provide. History can also negate petty sensationalism, which is all to apparent here. Events like these are not to be exploited, like the way Bush exploited his own foreign policy disaster (or as Wolfowitz coined, today's Pearl Harbor) to lead us into a completely unrelated war. The Foreign policy debate should move on -- there are many issues that Obama deserves praise for some, and criticism for others. Let's keep this factual and informed.
Left wing COVERUP on Benghazi to re-elect a president that never should have been elected in the first place!
Obama made a huge deal about this video and was acting like it was the video all along when they had a pretty good idea it was a terrorist attack. Not only that, but they were waving this video around telling the extremists all about it which lead to further riots in which people were killed. Plus, you had Obama giving speech to sooth the very people that he helped incite by virtually apologizing for free speech.
That isn't exactly reassuring in terms of his motive or competency.
Precisely. I can only hope this was complete and utter incompetence by Obama, Hillary, and Rice. To think this could have been a deliberate act is to unconscionable to contemplate.
OP and other Obama worshipers, I'll try to be brief and to the point and hopefully you'll begin to understand the scandal.
1. Multiple request from the Ambassador and security team for additional security were ALL denied by the administration.
2. Ambassador and three other Americans were killed in an attack which was watched on video in real time.
3. First reports from the administration were that it was a protest against a YouTube video and that the Libyan people rushed the Ambassador to a hospital to try to save him.
4. They said the above even thought they knew it to be a planned terrorist attack and the Ambassador was tortured and killed by the attackers.
5. The Obama administration repeatedly denied it was a terrorist attack saying it was a protest. They continued this line for more than a week even when it was obvious to virtually everyone that it wasn't about a video.
6. When they could not deny the truth any longer, they tried to pass the blame on the CIA and the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
7. While Hillary is OK with being under the bus, some members of the intelligence community are not lying down and are reporting their side of the story that they made every attempt to get additional security forces (American, not Libyan) and military help with the attack via an air strike,...all of which were denied by administration officials.
8. With such a major international incident going on, he flies off to Vegas to rais money for his re-election fund.
Does ANY of the attacks you listed include an attempted cover-up, multiple request for additional security being denied, the murder of our nation's ambassador, and the worst example of trying to spin the story to deflect blame onto a Secretary of State and the entire US Intelligence community? If not, then your point is a swing and a miss. Try again.
I think you are missing the point here. It's not all the terrorist attacks. It's the COVER UP of this
specific attack. President's should keep the people informed, not hide the facts. just to win & election.
yup.
this should be bigger than watergate.
obama and co, has proven time and time again they are nothing but liars, criminals & murderers...
Well, wait a minute....you said we "weren't even exposed" to them.
Which is it?
And you're going to blame the Bush Administration for lying and attempting to cover up those incidents, when in fact they were highly reported and no one in the Bush Administration tried to cover them up by blaming it on a video?
But bin Laden made no such video.
You're referring to the Fatty bin Laden video....which has been thoroughly debunked.
bin Laden was 6'6" tall -- the impostor in the video is not more than 5'10"
bin Laden barely weighs 165 lbs -- the impostor in the video is pushing 300 pounds.
bin Laden is left-handed -- the impostor in the video is clearly right-handed
bin Laden is a devout Sunni Muslim who never wore watches, necklaces or jewelry of any kind and a photo history of bin Laden since age 16 proves that -- the impostor in the video is heavily burdened and adorned with gold jewelry
bin Laden is an Arab and specifically a member of the Saud Tribe bearing all of the physical features of Arabs and of the Saud Tribe -- the impostor in the video was very obviously a Turco-Mongol.
Also, it would have been nice if you had credited....
....for the laundry list of attacks from their talking point memo.
Congratulating you for your incompetence....
Mircea
Time for some facts and put this to rest.
The Obama Administration requested $2.641 Billion for embassy security. The House proposed $2.311 Billion which was $330 Million less than the Administration requested. That would 12.49% less.
The Senate in a bi-partisan effort offered budget amendments that increase spending to $2.37 Billion which was $270 Million less, or 10.2% less than the Administration requested.
The cuts did not target any specific US diplomatic mission. Hillary as Secretary of State and responsible for administering and over-seeing the State Department's budget was free to spend money on embassy security as she saw fit. In addition to the money already available for embassy security, Hilliary could have taken money from any other programs in the State Department and used it to pay for security. She could have also asked for an emergency appropriations measure to provide more funding.
So, according to your differently twisted logic....if 199 Democrats in Congress vote to cut funding for embassy in security in general while 163 Republicans vote for it....
...the Republicans cut the budget....
...because we all know that 163 is greater than 199...
..right?
Yeah, whatever, you just hold onto that thought and cherish it.
Was the refusal to provide more security caused by budget cuts to embassy security? “No, sir,” Charlene Lamb, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Programs.
Of that you can be certain, but it's anyone's guess as to what exactly.
Perhaps the attack threatened to expose the Syrian (or Iranian) Slush Fund -- you know, diverting money from the State Department from one part of the budget to the budget of USAID or into black ops or something, or perhaps where the money goes is linked to al-Qaida in some way.
If true, that would explain a lot.
Speculating...
Mircea
Amen, sister.
Concurring....
Mircea
Exactly...
Mircea
nice post, and you covered a lot of territory.
it is pretty hard to rebut actual facts.
and since when did "lack of funds" stop this administration from doing anything????
denninger has a piece this morning on the embassy tragedy:
At least three men, including two now-dead ones, ignored the order to stand down and attempted to defend the consulate. They died defending American soil despite orders to not do so. Worse, during the attempted defense they managed to get a laser designator on the people firing on the annex and yet they couldn't get anyone to put ordnance on that location.
So exactly who refused help?
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.
