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.
he's manipulating his scope of disposition for the Benghazi hearing...they are all subject to Benghazi, it is an almost unbelievable outcome of events. They are all conspiring together for positioning and confusion away from the issue because they have no case to argue...it will not work....notice a portion of the hearing is not public.... we will find all out though, there is no escape, it will not be the Oprah style agenda.
I totally agree, Benghazi is the issue here....however, I just wonder how much will really come out....there was talk of taking Clinton out of office for what he did...what about what Obama did here....and mind you, the majority of the people still voted for him, how uninformed we all are.
I don't understand why he won't have to testify. He was head of the agency when the attacks happened. Civilian or not - he should have to say what he knows.
Other civilians have testified in other matters - the baseball players in the steroid witch hunt. GM, Ford and Chrysler execs on the auto bailouts.
Wasn't Hank Paulson a civilian when he testified? Not sure about that one. I am sure there are other examples.
Whether or not this is an example of "perfect timing" - something rotten in the state of Denmark - this reeks of corruption.
Yeah the whole "this is a set-up so that he won't have to testify" argument is STOOOOOPID.
As I said - whether or not he's still head of the CIA has NO BEARING on whether or not he testifies. Maybe he testifies, maybe he won't but IF he doesn't it WON'T be "because he's no longer the head of the CIA".
You have to wonder about these resignations and the decisions by some high profile elected pols not to run for re election. The spooks have dirt on everybody it seems and if somebody doesn't play ball, they're out. I think they're the enforcers and the POTUS, the Cabinet, party leaders soon find out that they will do as they're told. Damn convenient the timing of this resignation and the story breaking now and the best reason so far is so that now he won't have to testify.
Elvis is alive! I saw him at the library yesterday!
I totally agree, Benghazi is the issue here....however, I just wonder how much will really come out....there was talk of taking Clinton out of office for what he did...what about what Obama did here....and mind you, the majority of the people still voted for him, how uninformed we all are.
I'm very confident the issue will be fully sorted out for exactly what transpired. Reason being there is nothing but consistency in all the very compelling and known hard facts. Theres nothing mysterious in the whole development of this tragedy which is what they are trying to suggest, in the idea of an investigative effort.
The developing and ongoing claims that we were asked to consider, basically do nothing but contradict each other. Even the idea of an investigation which takes more then a day, strongly suggests that not only another similar event could be in motion now, but there is no grasp in the order of quickly addressing serious threatening issues. So the investigative stall and congestion in of itself, works against the objective to appear in keeping with duty.The framework for what happened needs an investigation? hmmm
A frame which is in place for national security needs months to untangle? That alone is inconceivable and contradicts all responsibilities. They will need to show what was read, what was said that without an investigation or thought easily in less then a day adamantly insisted the attack was due to a home movie. IOW...even if a note or word mentioned the known home movie ( which I doubt)... but what we need to know is where is the content, where is the note that gave sufficient "compelling evidence" to instantly declare to the world that "in fact the attack was due to a home movie"
What did you read allowing this full judgment call, a dangerous call as if you believed true, "then why, would you draw the worlds attention to a believed trigger which caused such violence, if true how could you not expect multiple re-occurences by the said, globally distributed and believed merit of this cause..?
Not to mention the most important re the "refusal to either send more help or give permission for the Ambassador to leave his post...The Ambassador and all stood in dedication and loyal service, and agreed to those terms only, in the understanding they were part of a team. The whole thing is so ridiculous a good exposure of everything would take a few days to organize. I have really super confidence in a full and exact uncovering of this entire incident.
Last edited by stargazzer; 11-10-2012 at 08:36 AM..
I'm not saying that, for goodness sakes, your only reading what your intellect will allow you to see....
Any women who runs around with a married man is an insult to the family institution, I'm not saying it's all the woman's fault, but she does or should have more control, especially when there are so many other people involved whose lives will be ruined....yes, the man is wrong, and a self centered pig for doing so...but the woman is just as bad....and what I'm saying is, this woman, is heartless....she laughed about it, she is just as much to blame if not more...that is what I'm saying. They both ruined lives, careers, however, she will come out on top b/c of this, his wife and family will suffer....and that is what a woman should think about before she makes a move on a married man or visa versa.
Your intellect is limited if you can't see that you are putting the responsibility on her and excusing him. Another perfect example of your intellect: you want her to resign. Resign from what? She works for herself. They both own the affair. Women are a disgrace, but the married man who runs around gets a pass because he's "weak"? Is it the woman's job to think about what can happen to two families? Do you realize that she had a husband and 2 children? Was Petreaus thinking about them or was that her job as well as thinking about what it could do to his family? Do you really think that her husband and children won't suffer because of what they BOTH did? Obviously neither of them were thinking about their own family or the family of the other.
She was a journalist for goodness sake. As far as she was concerned the affair was over once she had all her material for the book. Unfortunately he didn't think it was over because he kept pursuing her. Was that her fault as well? The affair ended just before he took charge of the CIA - a year ago. Journalists make their money writing and her next move will be a book about the affair. She's going to laugh all the way to the bank.
I'm not saying that, for goodness sakes, your only reading what your intellect will allow you to see....
Any women who runs around with a married man is an insult to the family institution, I'm not saying it's all the woman's fault, but she does or should have more control, especially when there are so many other people involved whose lives will be ruined....yes, the man is wrong, and a self centered pig for doing so...but the woman is just as bad....and what I'm saying is, this woman, is heartless....she laughed about it, she is just as much to blame if not more...that is what I'm saying. They both ruined lives, careers, however, she will come out on top b/c of this, his wife and family will suffer....and that is what a woman should think about before she makes a move on a married man or visa versa.
Why not say: "any woman or man who runs around with someone who is married is an insult to the family institution." In this case, she was just as married as he was. They both did wrong but the big difference here is that he knew from the beginning that his job would be compromised by the affair, should the affair become public. That gave him the bigger responsibility to keep their clothes on and his head in the place---both of his heads.
I didn't see her on TV but it does sound heartless on her part to flaunt the affair in public. But in truth, their families might have known about the affair for a very long time---it's been going on a year---and they might be glad they no longer have to pretend in public that their marriages are just fine and dandy.
Why not say: "any woman or man who runs around with someone who is married is an insult to the family institution." In this case, she was just as married as he was. They both did wrong but the big difference here is that he knew from the beginning that his job would be compromised by the affair, should the affair become public. That gave him the bigger responsibility to their clothes on.
I didn't see her on TV but it does sound heartless on her part to flaunt the affair in public. But in truth, their families might have known about the affair for a very long time---it's been going on a year---and they might be glad they no longer have to pretend in public that their marriages are just fine and dandy.
Sounds to me someone got burnt.
Sex for a book and then another book about the affair. Be interesting if they end up together. I see book 3!!!!!
Your intellect is limited if you can't see that you are putting the responsibility on her and excusing him. Another perfect example of your intellect: you want her to resign. Resign from what? She works for herself. They both own the affair. Women are a disgrace, but the married man who runs around gets a pass because he's "weak"? Is it the woman's job to think about what can happen to two families? Do you realize that she had a husband and 2 children? Was Petreaus thinking about them or was that her job as well as thinking about what it could do to his family? Do you really think that her husband and children won't suffer because of what they BOTH did? Obviously neither of them were thinking about their own family or the family of the other.
She was a journalist for goodness sake. As far as she was concerned the affair was over once she had all her material for the book. Unfortunately he didn't think it was over because he kept pursuing her. Was that her fault as well? The affair ended just before he took charge of the CIA - a year ago. Journalists make their money writing and her next move will be a book about the affair. She's going to laugh all the way to the bank.
Geeze Louise, you are purposely missing what I'm trying to explain...this is not one sided....but you refuse to view this in other ways, I'm not saying your wrong, I told you I agree with you? And yes, it is not only the woman's job to think about not only her family, but the whole of who she is hurting as well as the man, and if you react before you think, your going to hurt people...including self eventually, what we do to ourselves, we do to others...and where did I say the man gets a free pass? I am not putting the responsiblity on her...IT IS BOTH THEY'RE FAULT, BUT.....I blame the woman just as much, and this women is heartless to sit on TV and brag about it....if you cannot see that, then I feel very sorry for you....I don't care if she is a minister, you don't get on TV and smerck a bout it....in your words, a journalist doesn't get a free pass b/c she is a journalist? And how do you know who pursued who? Just like I don't know....but it is common knowledge that in most cases, not all, the woman can control her hormones more then a man, and that is something you have to understand, some day...there are woman out there who actually and purposely seduce men for whatever reason...
ONce again...if she laughs all the way to the bank, she is a cruel and heartless person possing no morals or concern for anyone else but herself....and to hurt as many people as she has to get there, well someday, Karma will come back to haunt her....believe me.
If you can't understand what I'm saying, then we agree to disagree....
what I meant by she should go and retire, is, she should go into hiding, slip away like the snake she is and stop bragging about it, or writing about it....
How, on the other hand, there is also a whole lot of corrut doings going on over in
Afghanistan, and perhaps that is what her motive is?
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.
