Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Benghazi Coverup Hearings-Starts Today  
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2887 times:

It looks like the "dirt" they tried to sweep under the rug is about to come out from under the rug.......starting today.

Intimidating the witnesses that can make you look bad may have worked until now, but it's quit working now; the people who know the truth are now ready to testify; many people think that after these people testify, there will be others who will find the courage to do so; we're about to find out.

Needless to say, this link leads to a story with people who are NOT Obama supporters, so as always happens, we will now hear the usual Obama supporters saying that "all these people are liars", "they don't know what they're talking about", etc., etc. etc. Moreover, I'm guessing they will be saying all those things BEFORE they even hear ONE witness testify. That's my obligatory opinion.

This situation reminds a lot of people of "events" right after Watergate; it does have similarities, but also has ONE HUGE "dis-similarity"..........no one DIED in Watergate; a bunch of people LIED, and many of them went to prison because they lied; and every liberal democrat in this country was dancing in the street, shouting, "impeach Nixon"....he lied ! Yeah, he lied, and he got caught, thanks to the monumental stupidity of a bunch of people; and we ALL know where it got him;

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/huc...7/id/503192?s=al&promo_code=1367B-

Charley


Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
81 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5419 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2879 times:

Quoting Geezer (Thread starter):

Well you seem to already know so there is apparently no need for hearings or anything to "start"! It's done! You have everything you need and the guilty are ready to be convicted! So I don't know you are on about, nothing to see hear, move along.

Sigh

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineWestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1830 posts, RR: 10
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2867 times:

Somebody is going to have to explain to me why this would result in the impeachment of a President? People in the President's administration clearly screwed up which resulted in a real tragedy, and those people should be dealt with harshly (nothing less than being fired and never working for the government again)...but how does this prove that he has "lost his right to govern"?

Second, why does anybody listen to anything Mike Huckabee has to say? I've listened to his show a couple times online, and the guy is totally out to lunch these days. There are so many better Republicans to get an opinion from, yet they choose Huckabee...

Quoting Geezer (Thread starter):
Yeah, he lied, and he got caught, thanks to the monumental stupidity of a bunch of people; and we ALL know where it got him;

Exactly. They were able to prove that there was wrong-doing, and it was followed by consequences that resulted in Nixon's resignation. Why do you insist on claiming that Obama is guilty before the hearing has taken place? Or does "innocent until proven guilty" not apply when you don't like the guy?

Quoting Geezer (Thread starter):
http://www.newsmax.com

You realize the reputation Newsmax has for being wildly biased, right? I went to Google News and found this same story from dozens of moderate sources. Literally took me 20 seconds.

Quoting Geezer (Thread starter):
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein

Entirely off-topic, but...the quote is actually for the definition of 'insanity', not 'stupidity'. Just a head's up for the sake of accuracy.



Flying refined.
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2866 times:

How come when American diplomats and American civilians were killed by foreign forces overseas, there were no hearing and no rumblings of the ineptitude of the commander in chief? Why were there no investigations to prop up the fact that the previous commander in chief was a liar?


Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2858 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 2):
how does this prove that he has "lost his right to govern"?

Because a small and vocal minority actually believe they are in the majority and they are starting from the point of "Obama must leave office at all cost." They are not looking for a reason AND THEN trying to get him kicked out. Like lying about WMDs or bypassing FISA courts or anything like that. They put out an opinion and build a case around their opinion.

Bush II had the biggest expansion of government ever. No one but no one on the far right said a word. They never stood up and DEMANDED Americans take up arms against the government. Oh, no. That would be disrespectful to the office!

I would love to see what they think about the deficit when the cost of war is added to it. Remember: Bush II kept all that spending off the books. Obama added it to the books.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3354 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2852 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 2):
Somebody is going to have to explain to me why this would result in the impeachment of a President? People in the President's administration clearly screwed up which resulted in a real tragedy, and those people should be dealt with harshly (nothing less than being fired and never working for the government again)...but how does this prove that he has "lost his right to govern"?

Because there is a double standard that favors Republicans. Remember they went after Clinton for lying about an affair which hardly took away his credibility to govern.

Now the same family values party just elected in South Carolina a man who left his wife and family for a Argentinean woman and has really shown no remorse.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21521 posts, RR: 55
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2851 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 2):
Second, why does anybody listen to anything Mike Huckabee has to say?

Mike Huckabee's only area of expertise these days is in lecturing about his own morality. I'd put little stock in anything else he talks about.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7824 posts, RR: 52
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2837 times:

Quoting Geezer (Thread starter):

You seem to have made up your mind before the fact, that is hardly being honest. I hope we get to the bottom of this once and for all and the truth comes out... whether that favors the President or not.

Honestly, I predict that no matter what the outcome, the President will still receive blame. Anything short of "he lied and committed treason" will just be dismissed as leftist lies. I hope I am wrong

Benghazi is the situation that completely turned me off the GOP. From day 1 all the way to today, right now, I'm NOT saying that the President is free of guilt, but I was absolutely disgusted at how the GOP immediately pinned the worst of blame on the President* and kept jumping from theory to theory... the details didn't matter, just fill in the blanks until you have a cover up and the President lying and intentionally getting people killed.

As they kept dragging it on and on and coming up with new ways to pin it on the President, I have taken the GOP less and less seriously. I don't believe for a second that most of the politicians are trying to get to the bottom of it for the 4 killed Americans's sake, they just want to disgrace the President


*And yes, I realize "the buck stops here" but still, there is only so much you can pin on the CiC.

Edit: I'll add one last thing: I absolutely think the press would be harder on the President if he was a Republican. That's a issue to take up with the media, though, that shouldn't change one's thoughts on whether there was really a cover up or not

[Edited 2013-05-07 21:43:04]


Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks ago) and read 2813 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 1):
Well you seem to already know so there is apparently no need for hearings or anything to "start"! It's done! You have everything you need and the guilty are ready to be convicted! So I don't know you are on about, nothing to see hear, move along.

I think if you read what you just wrote you'll see that it's completely unintelligible; (pretty hard to respond to something that's incomprehensible)

[quote=WestJet747,reply=2]Entirely off-topic, but...the quote is actually for the definition of 'insanity', not 'stupidity'. Just a head's up for the sake of accuracy.

Maybe the moderators will appoint you to "check out" ALL of the little "things" people put on their profiles for "accuracy"?
I'm sure you no doubt "assume" that you're the only one in North America that has ever read anything about Albert Einstein, but of course you're not.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 2):
You realize the reputation Newsmax has for being wildly biased, right? I went to Google News and found this same story from dozens of moderate sources. Literally took me 20 seconds.

Exactly like I predicted, only the second reply, and you're already attempting to "attack" the source ! ( no surprise there of course ); it's what liberals ALWAYS do......attack the source ! The whole problem with that rationale is of course, as long as the information reported is true, it doesn't make much difference where you hear it. I'm sure YOU get most of YOUR impeccable information from such "highly regarded" sources as the "Huffpo" and the "Dailey Kos" ? Speaking of which, how many items are you prepared to show us that were from NewsMax that are proven false ?

As I tend to be fairly conservative in my thinking most of the time, I really don't feel the need to waste much time reading news sources which are known to be totally unreliable 98% of the time.



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks ago) and read 2801 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 2):
I went to Google News and found this same story from dozens of moderate sources. Literally took me 20 seconds.

I think you're getting a little mixed up now........one minute you're "questioning my source" as being "biased", then the next minute you're saying a "moderate" source says the exact same thing ? so why are are you complaining about my source if by your own admission it's accurate ? And another thing........why, ( in your mind ), is one news source "biased" and another news source is "moderate" when they are BOTH reporting the SAME thing ? And it took you you 20 seconds ? I think that probably has more to do with the quality (speed?) of you internet connection than it does with the "quality" of your news source.



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks ago) and read 2786 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 11):
why, ( in your mind ), is one news source "biased" and another news source is "moderate" when they are BOTH reporting the SAME thing ?

The difference is, the Newsmax article starts with the quote from Huckabee that the "scandal" will cost the president his term in office as the article's title, rather than presenting a well-rounded report on the situation.

Compare it to NPR's story on the same subject:

Congressional Hearings Put Renewed Focus On Benghazi Attack

Huge difference.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinejohnboy From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2576 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2783 times:

.....and crickets chirp except for the Newsmax/WorldNetDaily/Drudge Report/Free Republic crowd in a big internet masturbatory frenzy.

User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2770 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 12):
Compare it to NPR's story on the same subject:

Oh my ! Next you'll be suggesting I should be reading "move on.org" right ? WRONG ! Ditto NPR;

I have one guy who thinks anything I say is BS, that everything the GOP says, does, or even thinks, is BS, but yet HE is "wounded" because I think HE is "liberal".........then YOU think I should pay attention to that well known, always middle of the road, NPR ! That's almost as funny as Congressperson "Fudge's" assessment of Jesse Jackson, JR.

Tell you what I AM going to do..........(I'll be getting my new hearing aids in the next day or two).......I'm going to turn the tube on and listen to the hearings;

What I'm NOT going to do is: waste any more time arguing back and forth about who thinks what about Obama; maybe this will happen, or maybe that will happen, but in the meantime, I'll post what I think MIGHT illustrate some of the nonsense going on, and you can all knock yourselves out posting anything you want to, whether it makes any sense or not. I have other fish to fry, so I'm going to start frying them first thing in the AM.



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlinepvjin From Finland, joined Mar 2012, 1212 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2724 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 12):
I have one guy who thinks anything I say is BS, that everything the GOP says, does, or even thinks, is BS,

That guy is right then, everyone knows that nowadays GOP is full of BS just like all these pathetic conspiracy theories are.

I think people should just forget the Benghazi attack, too bad for those who died but I don't see how this event was that significant when way bigger amounts of people die in terrorists attacks all the time in countries ruined by US forces, such as Iraq.



"A rational army would run away"
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13039 posts, RR: 12
Reply 14, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2712 times:

I won't deny serious mistakes were made as to dealing with the attacks on the American consulate in Benghazi, but what we will see today is nothing but a one-sided witch hunt by Republicans who hate the President and his Democratic party administration.
Of course looking back, we could have reacted differently to the deadly attack, but there are distance, communications and legal limits on what could have been done. You cannot have 100's of our special military forces go in minutes after the first attack in a foreign country, we don't have such forces, you couldn't bring them in fast enough and you might just trigger a war. There was no doubt this attack was well coordinated by al-Queda related groups, and it was difficult to forsee how severe it would be.


User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12390 posts, RR: 46
Reply 15, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2710 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Geezer (Thread starter):

Wait, I though this congressional hearing was to establish the facts? Has anyone told them the result is already known?

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 2):
Somebody is going to have to explain to me why this would result in the impeachment of a President?

Because it's the next big hope for the Obama-haters.   

Quoting Geezer (Reply 12):
I have one guy who thinks anything I say is BS, that everything the GOP says, does, or even thinks, is BS

It's not like it's just the one.   



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4472 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2677 times:

Quoting Geezer (Thread starter):
we will now hear the usual Obama supporters saying that "all these people are liars",

This pretty much sums up why this whole Benghazi thing is nothing but Political BS. A bunch of old Geezers are just trying to make political gains.


Quoting Geezer (Thread starter):
Moreover, I'm guessing they will be saying all those things BEFORE they even hear ONE witness testify. That's my obligatory opinion.

And what Pray, Tell , are you doing?

Quoting Geezer (Reply 12):
What I'm NOT going to do is: waste any more time arguing back and forth about who thinks what about Obama;

Why do you keep bringing up Obama in a hearing on what happened at much lower levels? I think you are the one with preformed opinions and they are driven by piss poor fake news organizations .



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2712 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2669 times:

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 14):
Of course looking back, we could have reacted differently to the deadly attack, but there are distance, communications and legal limits on what could have been done. You cannot have 100's of our special military forces go in minutes after the first attack in a foreign country, we don't have such forces, you couldn't bring them in fast enough and you might just trigger a war

Did we (NATO) not just do that when we helped bring down the legal government of that country? What a joke. A rapid response team was in country and was told to stand down and not board a C-130 bound for Benghazi. Fast jets that had months before been bombing Qaddafis forces had been a short hop away in Italy and aboard a carrier in the Med. The CIA ex Seals that had been killed in the attack could of called in the airstrike with precision but they also had been told to stand down.



OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4472 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2649 times:

Quoting windy95 (Reply 17):
What a joke. A rapid response team was in country and was told to stand down and not board a C-130 bound for Benghazi.

Seriously???? You are just showing plain ignorance. You are also dishonoring those you died. For your homework lesson go look up the deceased and where they were at 8:00 that night.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2712 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2641 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 18):
Seriously???? You are just showing plain ignorance.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/06/politi...er/index.html?sr=sharebar_facebook

As far as dishonoring those who died it is O'Bummer and those that defend his inaction in this case that are doing that.



OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently offlineCalebWilliams From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 305 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2638 times:

This just in: The GOP has only two planks in their current platform: Benghazi and Obamacare.

Maybe they can get elected in 2016 with these two issues, but probably not.




Caleb Williams MSP AUS STL AMS CPH LGW YYZ
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4472 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2635 times:

Quoting windy95 (Reply 19):
Quoting casinterest (Reply 18):
Seriously???? You are just showing plain ignorance.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/06/politi...ebook

Thanks for showing your ignorance. Please quote from that document........>
I will be waiting,

Quoting windy95 (Reply 19):
As far as dishonoring those who died it is O'Bummer and those that defend his inaction in this case that are doing that.

Not only ignorance but just politicking disrespect and hatred.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2624 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 12):
Oh my ! Next you'll be suggesting I should be reading "move on.org" right ?

So, as with the rest of the right-wing media, you find sources to fit your opinions instead of finding sources that fit the facts.

What does it matter anyway? You (and half of the right-wing) have tried, convicted and impeached Obama for everything from Benghazi to his religion to how he holds his fork. You far right wingers will do anything to make Obama look bad. Up to and including outright lies. You on the far right care more about making Obama and Democrats look bad than actually balancing the budget or growing the economy or doing anything useful for the American people. That is why people are so turned off by the media and by elected officials. That is why the rest of the world does not take us seriously.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineblueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3931 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2606 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Geezer (Reply 12):
Next you'll be suggesting I should be reading "move on.org" right ?

Any news source that accurately predicted the day before the elections that Romney would lose will do. At least you'll know they're not in the business of manufacturing their own facts.

Quoting CalebWilliams (Reply 20):
Maybe they can get elected in 2016 with these two issues, but probably not.

I think they've already conceded that Hilary will run and win (not to worry, they'll find something to impeach her over). In the meantime, every GOP member is focusing on winning their own primaries where, it should be clear by now, only geezers vote and moderation wins you no office.



I've got $h*t to do
User currently offlinehelvknight From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2632 times:

Much of what is written about Benghazi really can be summmed up with a simple graphic:



User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 25, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2661 times:

Fox News is delivering the message hard this morning. Everyone else is covering the Amanda Berry homecoming and general news, but Fox is Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi.


International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinewingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2213 posts, RR: 5
Reply 26, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2645 times:

Repubs, suddenly concerned about dead diplos and the deficit only when a Dem walks into the picture. It's no wonder this party is Dead White Guys Walking. With every passing day they dig a bigger hole of hypocritical bullshit to bury themselves in. Great chart above about diplo deaths under Bush, that kinda just seals the deal right there. It's a dangerous world and trying to prevent death in violent foreign postings is simply impossible.

On the other hand, sending 5000 American kids to their deaths over a Fedex tube that was supposed to actually be an ICBM launcher threatening NYC was just fine. $2T later and a 100,000 wounded kids trying to pick up the pieces of their shattered lives and war mongering Repubs still have no shame. Cheney, Bush, Wolfowitz, and Rummy still walk free across the fairways of their ultra exclusive country clubs and the best these numbnuts can fixate on is Benghazi.

We'll see how this pans out with the electorate. Not good for the GOP, I can assure you. The party has lost it's alst working compass.


User currently offlinehelvknight From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 27, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2650 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 26):
Fox News is delivering the message hard this morning. Everyone else is covering the Amanda Berry homecoming and general news, but Fox is Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi.

Obviously Fox is working hard on Brand Awareness.

https://soundcloud.com/mike-in-raleigh/right-wing-troll-notification

[Edited 2013-05-08 08:38:34]

User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8188 posts, RR: 8
Reply 28, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2625 times:

Quoting Geezer (Thread starter):
so as always happens, we will now hear the usual Obama supporters saying that "all these people are liars", "they don't know what they're talking about",

Well, we did have Dr. RIce talking the company line before the SecState nomination.

EXACTLY like WMDs in Iraq - a different Dr. Rice. Both black women who had exceptional educations. The difference is that Dr. Susan Rice got her "talking points" from the CIA, who had General David David Petraeus as the Director. And this was at the time when Petraeus was under a lot of pressure because his shacking up with his biographer had been discovered - but not made public.

So the FIRST witness should be no other than Petraeus. What did he know about the talking points before they were sent to the White House? What actions did he take to change the talking points? Was the discover of his shagging his biographer putting any pressure on his performance of his job? Did he even bother to LOOK at the talking points?

Since everything else in this "affair" rests on the CIA talking points we clearly need Petraeus to be the first witness so we can get to the meat of the matter. (Pun intended.) I doubt if that will happen if the GOP has any influence in who is called. If he doesn't show up he can't lie - can he?

Quoting Geezer (Thread starter):
Moreover, I'm guessing they will be saying all those things BEFORE they even hear ONE witness testify.

Look at what I'm saying: General Petraeus was responsible for the CIA talking points sent to the White House.

Quoting Geezer (Thread starter):
This situation reminds a lot of people of "events" right after Watergate

Reminds me more of the "events" after the invasion of Iraq - with no weapons to be found.

Quoting Geezer (Thread starter):
and every liberal democrat in this country was dancing in the street, shouting, "impeach Nixon"....he lied !

The hatred I saw during the Watergate years was nothing to the hate I see for our Black President. His election has brough out the best in American and also the worst in America.

Quoting Geezer (Thread starter):
.no one DIED in Watergate

And how many have died because of the "WMD in Iraq" lies? There are still Americans at risk of being killed there, but the harsh reality is that MORE Americans have died in Iraq because of those lies than were killed on 9/11.

Why don't we have some real hearings into the lies that led to that totally unnecessary invasion?


User currently offlineWestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1830 posts, RR: 10
Reply 29, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2603 times:

I'm trying to figure out why my post was deleted because of "Reference Post Deleted" when the two posts I referenced are still there   Anyway, I'll move on...

Quoting Geezer (Reply 12):
I have one guy who thinks anything I say is BS, that everything the GOP says, does, or even thinks, is BS, but yet HE is "wounded" because I think HE is "liberal"

I assume this is referring to me?

I do think everything that the GOP says, does, or thinks is BS. The party has lost their way, and doesn't even resemble what it it to be true conservatives. They might as well change their name to the Anti-Democrat Party.

What makes you think I'm wounded by you thinking I'm liberal? All I said was that I don't identify myself as a liberal. I actually don't see anything wrong with being liberal, certainly nothing to be offended by, it's just not the views that I align myself with.

Quoting windy95 (Reply 19):
O'Bummer


Name-calling is pretty childish.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 4):
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 5):
Quoting Mir (Reply 6):
Quoting scbriml (Reply 15):

Those reasons are all good and well, and thank you for your responses...but I'm still holding out to see how the OP answers those questions, perhaps in between personal attacks on my credibility.



Flying refined.
User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 30, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2570 times:

This is hilarious. The anchor for Fox's coverage of the hearings just said they were going to a commercial break as it was a good time "due to the Democratic questioners having a lopsided share of airtime".

Good thing I was sitting down, otherwise I would have fallen over!  

Returning to coverage, they just broke away to a commentator when the democratic congressman from Massachusetts got his turn to ask questions.

[Edited 2013-05-08 10:50:01]


International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5419 posts, RR: 8
Reply 31, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2550 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 8):
Maybe the moderators will appoint you to "check out" ALL of the little "things" people put on their profiles for "accuracy"?
I'm sure you no doubt "assume" that you're the only one in North America that has ever read anything about Albert Einstein, but of course you're not.

What the heck are you on about? I have no idea if you quoted me intending to respond, meant to quote me at all, or mixed me in accidentally.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 22):
What does it matter anyway? You (and half of the right-wing) have tried, convicted and impeached Obama for everything from Benghazi to his religion to how he holds his fork. You far right wingers will do anything to make Obama look bad. Up to and including outright lies. You on the far right care more about making Obama and Democrats look bad than actually balancing the budget or growing the economy or doing anything useful for the American people. That is why people are so turned off by the media and by elected officials. That is why the rest of the world does not take us seriously.

Remember, he and all his policies, and those of like minded people, must fail in order to bring peace to a disrupted opposition.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 31):
This is hilarious. The anchor for Fox's coverage of the hearings just said they were going to a commercial break as it was a good time "due to the Democratic questioners having a lopsided share of airtime".

Good thing I was sitting down, otherwise I would have fallen over!

Returning to coverage, they just broke away to a commentator when the democratic congressman from Massachusetts got his turn to ask questions.

It is only because they want to be fair and balanced and not play favorites or be perceived as doing such....

Tugg

[Edited 2013-05-08 11:06:20]


I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 32, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2540 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 32):
It is only because they want to be fair and balanced

Keeping on that theme ... Fox has just brought Oliver North in from the cold to interpret the testimony so far today for us all.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5419 posts, RR: 8
Reply 33, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2533 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 33):
Keeping on that theme ... Fox has just brought Oliver North in from the cold to interpret the testimony so far today for us all.

If it weren't just sooo blatant..... Maybe they will bring on Howard Dean but they might mix it up and have Paula Dean instead to keep things balanced. The two are easily confused.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8790 posts, RR: 24
Reply 34, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2534 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 31):
The anchor for Fox's coverage of the hearings just said they were going to a commercial break as it was a good time "due to the Democratic questioners having a lopsided share of airtime".

Good thing I was sitting down, otherwise I would have fallen over!

Hardly a mystery. The Dems are hoping to filibuster the entire proceeding as best they can - they have absolutely no interest in exposing the facts. One side seems to want to get the facts, one side seems to want to cover Hillary and Obama’s asses.

Most interesting testimony so far is that the FEST team was indeed ordered to stand down, and that Greg Hicks, Deputy US Chief of Mission was flabergasted at the "Youtube video" rationale the administration pushed, as it was clearly a fabrication.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1-XWAMuJjg&feature=youtu.be
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcoUa0-OZso&feature=youtu.be

Quoting CalebWilliams (Reply 20):

The big issue, Celeb, is not that the attacks happened. Attacks happen. We have enemies. Some attacks will get through no matter how tight our security is.

The difference is that, as far as i can remember, GWBush never tried to explain away an embassy explosion as a gas leak or some such, for the purpose of political spin.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4472 posts, RR: 2
Reply 35, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2523 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 35):
The difference is that, as far as i can remember, GWBush never tried to explain away an embassy explosion as a gas leak or some such, for the purpose of political spin.

It was never "Explained Away" . This is another example of a lie perpetuated by the ignorant watchers of the Fake news entertainment channel. .



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13168 posts, RR: 78
Reply 36, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2511 times:

Hell of a bit quicker than the 9/11 commission, which Bush fought hard to prevent ever being formed.
I don't expect honest answers from the bitter, sore loser, paranoids who make such a noise about Benghazi, yet I don't recall much from the nutty right on that back then.
Or is a terrorist event on US soil that kills some 3000 not as important if you happen to like the then President?

Still, let 'em have their little show.
He won last year, the demographics are not in favour of the loopy right, at the heart of it, that is the real driver for these endless threads. A deep howl of existential frustration.
To the OP. Your side lost, it's going to get worse for your side unless you get rational, you so called America lovers with your parnoid ranting, does sometimes times get reported elsewhere and what a sorry image it makes.


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8790 posts, RR: 24
Reply 37, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2496 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 36):
It was never "Explained Away" .

I call BS. For 2 weeks they tried to say it was not an organized terrorist attack - that it was simply a protest that got a bit carried away over some stupid video (the maker of which is still rotting in jail, by the way). The ONLY reason they did this was because the presidential election was weeks away, and they did not want to admit that terrorism was still a problem.

Is it an impeachable offense? No. Obama never had to testify under oath about it, so he can't be impeached over this. But some of his administration did, and IMHO this incident just fuels the conception that many have that this administration will lie their asses off for any political gain, knowing how most of the media will smooth things over.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 29):
The hatred I saw during the Watergate years was nothing to the hate I see for our Black President.

Pulling the race card again I see? His being black has nothing to do with it. It's his beliefs. He comes from the tradition of Woodrow Wilson and the progressive movement that sees government as a wonderful, good thing that is supposed to take care of us. We see government is necessary for somethings that are necessary and cannot be done any other way, but as a general rule is inefficient, serves the power elite and will generally screw up most things it touches, and therefore needs to be held under strict control.

It's a big and expensive divergence of opinions. Our opinion (apparently shared by you) earns us the labels of ‘insane’, ‘reactionary’, ‘racist’, ‘Nazi’, and ‘warmonger’. My only disappointment is that, knowing something about your age, I'm surprised you don't know better.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4472 posts, RR: 2
Reply 38, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2481 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 38):
I call BS. For 2 weeks they tried to say it was not an organized terrorist attack - that it was simply a protest that got a bit carried away over some stupid video (the maker of which is still rotting in jail, by the way). The ONLY reason they did this was because the presidential election was weeks away, and they did not want to admit that terrorism was still a problem.

I'll double down on your BS

The president called it an attack on September 12. The only thing Fake news Tinfoil guru's care about is that he didn't call it a 100% Guaranteed Terrorist attack when they wanted it to be. Stupid semantics, and it still doesn't change the fact that 4 people died.

As for the election being "Weeks" away. It was still 2 months and 3 debates away to which you notice this still wasn't an issue.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7824 posts, RR: 52
Reply 39, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2473 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 35):
Hardly a mystery. The Dems are hoping to filibuster the entire proceeding as best they can - they have absolutely no interest in exposing the facts. One side seems to want to get the facts, one side seems to want to cover Hillary and Obama’s asses.

Sorry Dread, I'm gonna have to disagree. From the very first second of this attack it was pinned against the President in the very worst way, and as new info came out, the anti-President rhetoric kept morphing... never letting up on the blame. It totally seems like the GOP has an agenda, they way they have picked up on the story with such fury you'd never see if it was GWB in office.

And don't get me wrong, I completely think a Democrat can get away with a lot more than a Republican can in regards to the media and other Democrats... there most definitely is a double standard IMO. This Benghazi mess just went too far the other way to the point of absurdity and was the moment I completely got turned off by the GOP

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 35):
The difference is that, as far as i can remember, GWBush never tried to explain away an embassy explosion as a gas leak or some such, for the purpose of political spin.

     



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 40, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2451 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 35):
The Dems are hoping to filibuster the entire proceeding as best they can - they have absolutely no interest in exposing the facts.

   The Dems were allowed the same amount of time as the Repubs. It would have helped if you'd been watching the same coverage before being critical.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7824 posts, RR: 52
Reply 41, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2437 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 38):
they did not want to admit that terrorism was still a problem

I wrote of this earlier, where did the President say that terrorism wasn't still a problem? The only place I heard this was from the right... I saw it as the right disagreeing with something they made up. Unless I'm mistaken and you have a source?

And the President did state it was an act of terror the day after, so again, I'm confused... so many people are Monday morning quarkerbacking every tiny thing that happened in the timeline, of course there will be some weird things, you can nitpick anything to make it look like a conspiracy



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13168 posts, RR: 78
Reply 42, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2419 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 42):
And the President did state it was an act of terror the day after, so again, I'm confused... so many people are Monday morning quarkerbacking every tiny thing that happened in the timeline, of course there will be some weird things, you can nitpick anything to make it look like a conspiracy

It's not as if the general situation on the ground in Libya was fast changing, chaotic, with several all quite possible motives behind the attack........oh wait, that's just what it was.

What say those obsessed with all this on the death of over 200 US Marines in Lebanon in 1983, when Saint Ronnie was President?
(Maybe best not bring that up, aside from the actual tragic loss of life there was cut and running, then illegal supply of US arms to Iran - so thence possibly to terrorists - just to get a few US hostages out of Lebanon).
All done by one of their political icons.


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7824 posts, RR: 52
Reply 43, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2416 times:

Quoting GDB (Reply 43):

So true. If the GOP was bringing all this up to analyze the way we handle this situation and prevent this from happening again (and in honor of those who died) I'd commend them, but the way I see it, it isn't about these poor 4 Americans, they're just being used as pawns in a political witch hunt and I find it disgusting and apparently, so does most of the country. But I'm sure I'll be dismissed as "listening to leftist media and being a puppet of the President's propaganda, burying my head in the sand, a sheeple, etc."

And ironically, I listened almost exclusively to right wing media during the whole debacle, so it's not like I was just playing Jay Carney and CNN soundbites



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5419 posts, RR: 8
Reply 44, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2402 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 44):
it isn't about these poor 4 Americans, they're just being used as pawns in a political witch hunt and I find it disgusting and apparently, so does most of the country.

  
I keep wondering when the Republican's will learn this. I hope they do because they only damage themselves and the party when they try to make EVERYTHING the Presidents fault. It never has been the case and never will be. Yes "the buck stop here" with the President and they shoulder blame and responsibility for what happens under their watch, but just as President Bush was not "responsible" for the 9/11 attacks and the failures that occurred leading up to them, neither is President Obama or any other President for situations like this.

It is truly sad just how riled up some get about this and the NEED to blame President Obama. Just investigate and fix the problems and work to reduce (because it is near impossible to prevent it absolutely) a future similar occurrence.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21521 posts, RR: 55
Reply 45, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2380 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 35):
Most interesting testimony so far is that the FEST team was indeed ordered to stand down, and that Greg Hicks, Deputy US Chief of Mission was flabergasted at the "Youtube video" rationale the administration pushed, as it was clearly a fabrication.

Except that he also said the team wasn't going to be going to the annex anyway, but rather to the airport to secure it in order to evacuate people.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 35):
The difference is that, as far as i can remember, GWBush never tried to explain away an embassy explosion as a gas leak or some such, for the purpose of political spin.

Is that really what this is about? How, in the confusion of the moment with lots of information and little time to sift through it, statements were made that later turned out to be inaccurate? Seems quite a stretch for a scandal.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7824 posts, RR: 52
Reply 46, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2366 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 46):
Is that really what this is about? How, in the confusion of the moment with lots of information and little time to sift through it, statements were made that later turned out to be inaccurate? Seems quite a stretch for a scandal.

Probably didn't help that so many people were foaming at the mouth and demanding to know every tiny detail right when it hit the fan... just like with the Newtown and Boston conspiracies. Some info doesn't match because unsurprisingly, the 100%-detail-machine broke and these little economics spread and snowball into full blown conspiracy theories.

I take intesrest in conspiracy theories, the crazy ones especially. I don't believe any of them, but they are interesting. The way this Benghazi conspiracy theory formed reeks of the same stench the Newtown and Boston conspiracies were formed...



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineaaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8021 posts, RR: 26
Reply 47, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2357 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 45):
Just investigate and fix the problems and work to reduce (because it is near impossible to prevent it absolutely) a future similar occurrence.

Seriously. How about starting with the bloat in the intelligence agencies and the cat-and-mouse game they play with the State Department on need-to-know versus not-need-to-know and all the other overlapping responsibilities and information releases that occur on a daily basis in that part of the world. Clean up that side of things and a lot of things get a whole lot more efficient.

Quoting tugger (Reply 45):
Yes "the buck stop here" with the President and they shoulder blame and responsibility for what happens under their watch, but just as President Bush was not "responsible" for the 9/11 attacks and the failures that occurred leading up to them, neither is President Obama or any other President for situations like this.

  



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5419 posts, RR: 8
Reply 48, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2345 times:

Quoting aaron747 (Reply 48):
Seriously. How about starting with the bloat in the intelligence agencies and the cat-and-mouse game they play with the State Department on need-to-know versus not-need-to-know and all the other overlapping responsibilities and information releases that occur on a daily basis in that part of the world. Clean up that side of things and a lot of things get a whole lot more efficient.

But what use is that? How will that lead to being able to blame the President and kick him out of office?

Sadly what you offer as actual useable results from this investigation will likely be overwhelmed with the ridiculous politicking going on. And lately that is almost all that goes on nowadays (on both sides of the aisle). It will become theater and little else.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8188 posts, RR: 8
Reply 49, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2350 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 38):
Pulling the race card again I see?

Still living with your head in the sand? Did you miss the CNN story about the segregated school proms in good old backwater Georgia?

Here's the link:

http://schoolsofthought.blogs.cnn.co...on-yields-to-unity/?iref=allsearch

And here is a simple paragraph from the story:

Quote:

Mareshia and her friends bucked 40 years of local customs this month by organizing their own integrated prom, a formal dance open to Wilcox County's white, black, Latino and Asian high school students. Organizers, both black and white, said they lost friends in the process - a grim experience in the waning weeks of the school year. It's been hard on the rest of their hometown, too.

Be sure you don;'t miss that " Organizers, both black and white, said they lost friends in the process " bit.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 38):
We see government is necessary for somethings that are necessary and cannot be done any other way, but as a general rule is inefficient, serves the power elite and will generally screw up most things it touches, and therefore needs to be held under strict control.

In other words the conservatives are more concerned about not paying taxes than in life's little challenges (like food, health care, etc.) that those in the serf class endure. Nothing to be proud of that from what I can see. You don't need to be a liberal to want this country to be civilized - being a Moderate lets you see the issues clear enough.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 38):
My only disappointment is that, knowing something about your age, I'm surprised you don't know better.

Read that CNN article and you'll see where MY disappointment comes from. Conservatives are very careful not to say it outright most of the time, but they sure suck up as many votes as they can from racial hatred. That goes back to when LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act and said that it will give the South to the GOP for 50 years.

As far as my age goes, it means I have had time to see the "Whites Only" signs in the South when I was growing up. (I grew up where my father was transferred to - pretty normal when you work for an oil company.). I've got enough years under me to have served in an integrated Navy and was able to see that was how it should be anywhere. I lived long enough to have spent 8 years overseas and have been able to see that it is a Good Thing to get the dead albatross of employer nanny care off the companies' backs. And that also allowed me to confirm my belief that universal health care at the core level is a moral imperative in order for us to be a civilized country. IMO our national health systems are as backward as the traditional prom programs in Wilcox County, Georgia .

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 40):
From the very first second of this attack it was pinned against the President in the very worst way, and as new info came out, the anti-President rhetoric kept morphing... never letting up on the blame.

Of course the GOP is playing their game. They simply cannot believe that the voters didn't bow down to them and elect McCain and Romney President. But then the GOP is a far different party that the "Old Days" when I was a registered Republican.


User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 50, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2325 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 26):
Fox News is delivering the message hard this morning. Everyone else is covering the Amanda Berry homecoming and general news, but Fox is Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi.

And this surprises you ? When have you ever known the liberal news media to say ANYTHING that might possibly make Obama look bad ?



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7824 posts, RR: 52
Reply 51, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2316 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 51):
And this surprises you ? When have you ever known the liberal news media to say ANYTHING that might possibly make Obama look bad ?

You know, every single media outlet that's not Fox News isn't the liberal media. There is definitely a lot of liberal bias out there but thinking that Benghazi is a GOP witch hunt doesn't mean you're liberal...



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13039 posts, RR: 12
Reply 52, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2304 times:

Another major problem with figuring out what happened in Benghazi is that many possible answers cannot be given due to breaching necessary security factors including security procedures, identify spies and security agents, put locals in Libya who helped the USA in danger as well as possibly disclose security at the embassies and consulate offices.

User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 53, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2301 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 51):
When have you ever known the liberal news media to say ANYTHING that might possibly make Obama look bad ?

Since you scoffed at the suggestion of reading the article from NPR I gave the link for yesterday, how would you know if you don't watch or read what you consider "liberal news media"? It may actually surprise you if you went into it with an open mind.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8188 posts, RR: 8
Reply 54, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2279 times:

Quoting aaron747 (Reply 48):
Clean up that side of things and a lot of things get a whole lot more efficient.

We tried that after 9/11. IIRC we have some Super Duper Overall Intelligence Department now that is supposed to co-ordinate EVERYTHING. Who really believes that EVERYTHING generated in the field from all those underling agencies can actually be bring everything together under one roof so the Director of this massive intelligence agency can provide the President a FULL briefing? Does this guy even get an hour in the Oval Office? Regardless of who is President?


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 55, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2216 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 32):
Remember, he and all his policies, and those of like minded people, must fail in order to bring peace to a disrupted opposition.

It goes WAAAAAAAAY beyond that. In order for the far-right wing to be silenced, Obama must be removed from office completely. At all cost. That is their objective. That way, they can point to him being ousted from office and say "See?? Those damned liberal policies don't work!! You HAVE to elect us!!!"

What I don't get is: When the attack happened, no one knew why. There was an anti-Islam video out and it was Sept. 11. Security was on higher alert because of Sept. 11. But, when one woman went on TV saying it was the anti-Islam video that sparked the killings, the right ran with it. The right didn't even bother to stop a few days later and listen to what the official account was. All they want is lies. As in: the administration lied. When, in fact, it was just a few underlings.

Oh, wait... there's that word again: fact. No one at the hearings want facts. Sorry. My bad.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 56, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2196 times:

And now from the Senate side of things:

Top Republican ‘Fairly Satisfied’ With White House’s Account Of Benghazi

Quote:
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ranking Member Bob Corker (R-TN) said Wednesday that he's "fairly satisfied" with the Obama administration's account of events that led to the deaths of American diplomats in Benghazi last year.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 57, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2124 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 58):
Security was on higher alert because of Sept. 11.

Add to that the point that the right claims funding was cut for security. It is the House who appropriates spending. The right has been in control of the House (and the Senate, too, but that's for another thread) since November 2010. Then, the right turns around and screams that Obama cut funding.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 58, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2113 times:

While I was looking at the timeline on the attack again, a question came up I don't think I've ever seen answered.

The first attack was against the fortified consulate building. The second attack the next day was at a nearby CIA annex in a different diplomatic compound, where the loss of life and injuries occurred.

Why did the ambassador and his staff move to a less secure area so soon after the initial attack?



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13168 posts, RR: 78
Reply 59, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2091 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 47):
Probably didn't help that so many people were foaming at the mouth and demanding to know every tiny detail right when it hit the fan... just like with the Newtown and Boston conspiracies. Some info doesn't match because unsurprisingly, the 100%-detail-machine broke and these little economics spread and snowball into full blown conspiracy theories.

I take intesrest in conspiracy theories, the crazy ones especially. I don't believe any of them, but they are interesting. The way this Benghazi conspiracy theory formed reeks of the same stench the Newtown and Boston conspiracies were formed...

This happened on 9/11, remember how in the chaos of the day, a Delta flight was listed as possibly under hostile control? This when the FAA and USAF were struggling to understand, contain and respond to an unprecedented situation. The news media, equally confused, ran with it for a while.
It was just a mistake in the fog of this new kind of war, of course the conspiracy nuts really ran with it.

This is the question that people of sense in the GOP need to address, just how good a strategy is it to increasingly resemble the tin foil hat brigade?
Not just the fringes either, this is involving elected lawmakers, the public face of the party.
And they are getting more extreme, more obtuse and some just plain crazy.

If the current demographic trends continue, more Latinos, more younger people voting, (the attempts at voter suppression by the GOP seems to have backfired last year in getting out the vote, but not theirs), maybe in 2020 or thereabouts if Texas becomes competitive, they'll finally smell the coffee. (After all, California went Democrat, Colorado and Nevada have too).

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 50):
That goes back to when LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act and said that it will give the South to the GOP for 50 years.

Whatever else he did, good or ill, or whatever it's thought about LBJ as a person, that was a singular piece of political courage, putting what's right before party.
Don't see much of what these days.


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8188 posts, RR: 8
Reply 60, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2050 times:

Quoting soon7x7 (Reply 56):
Liberalism truly is a mental dissorder

Are you off your meds?

Quoting soon7x7 (Reply 56):
You on the left just love to hear yourself talk.

Ever hear of Rush, Cruz, etc. The Conservatives have far more mouths flapping than the liverals ever had. Standing in the middle asa moderate it's pretty easy to hear where the real crazy stuff comes from.

Quoting soon7x7 (Reply 56):
No one takes us seriously

Looking at your comments it is pretty obvious that no one takes you seriously.

Quoting GDB (Reply 62):
Don't see much of what these days.

We actually saw it when the poiliticians in Congress voted for ObamaCare. Major steps forward like that tend to take political courage.


User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 61, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2027 times:

Quoting GDB (Reply 59):
This is the question that people of sense in the GOP need to address, just how good a strategy is it to increasingly resemble the tin foil hat brigade?

I honestly don't think they care as long as it keeps the money rolling into PACs and campaigns, and the ballots keep getting cast.

It's interesting though, yesterday the right wingers were frothing at the mouth about the imminent collapse of the Obama administration and the release of information during Wednesday's hearings that'd be damaging to Hillary. Now it's come out, and the crickets are beginning to chirp in some corners. Even a top Republican in the Senate has basically said that this isn't a story.

Dana Milbank at the WaPo had an interesting piece on it today:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...-11e2-b94c-b684dda07add_story.html

Quote:
They summoned a whistleblower to Capitol Hill, but instead they got a virtuoso storyteller.

Gregory Hicks, the No. 2 U.S. diplomat in Libya the night Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed, was to be the star witness for Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the man leading the probe of the Obama administration’s handling of the attack on the diplomatic outpost in Benghazi.

But despite Issa’s incautious promise that the hearing’s revelations would be “damaging” to Hillary Rodham Clinton, Hicks didn’t lay a glove on the former secretary of state Wednesday. Rather, he held lawmakers from both parties rapt as he recounted the events of that terrifying night — revealing a made-for-Hollywood plot with a slow, theatrical delivery and genuine emotion.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7824 posts, RR: 52
Reply 62, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2013 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 61):
It's interesting though, yesterday the right wingers were frothing at the mouth about the imminent collapse of the Obama administration and the release of information during Wednesday's hearings that'd be damaging to Hillary. Now it's come out, and the crickets are beginning to chirp in some corners. Even a top Republican in the Senate has basically said that this isn't a story.

Sadly I don't think anything but the resignation of the President will quell them. Anything short of that is liberal bias, of course. I mean really, bring forth the damning evidence or move on already



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 63, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1961 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 62):
I don't think anything but the resignation of the President will quell them.

I just wonder why they think Joe Biden would be a much better president? The pessimistic side of me thinks they just want an old white guy in the White House again because they fear change. Other than that, I can't figure out why a man who wants to give everyone a hand up would be better than a guy who wants to give everyone a hand up?



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5980 posts, RR: 3
Reply 64, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1915 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 63):
The pessimistic side of me thinks they just want an old white guy in the White House again because they fear change.

On one hand it's that ever-present lust to get payback for Watergate.

On the other hand, take a look at who's leading the hypothetical field for the 2016 Presidential election, and it's glaringly obvious why we're now on to the 9th round of Benghazi hearings.


User currently offlinejohnboy From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2576 posts, RR: 7
Reply 65, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1882 times:



User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 66, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1860 times:

Fingers are being pointed at the CIA and White House regarding the progression of edits to the final version of the story re the Benghazi attack.

(ABC News) Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference

Quote:
When it became clear last fall that the CIA’s now discredited Benghazi talking points were flawed, the White House said repeatedly the documents were put together almost entirely by the intelligence community, but White House documents reviewed by Congress suggest a different story.

ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before she appeared on five talk shows the Sunday after that attack. ...

… A source familiar with the White House emails on the Benghazi talking point revisions say that State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland was raising two concerns about the CIA’s first version of talking points, which were going to be sent to Congress:  1) The talking points went further than what she was allowed to say about the attack during her state department briefings; and, 2) she believed the CIA was attempting to exonerate itself at the State Department’s expense by suggesting CIA warnings about the security situation were ignored.

In the above link, a PDF file of the edits is available, to let you make up your own mind.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinewingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2213 posts, RR: 5
Reply 67, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1847 times:

Man, where were the Extreme Right Wingers when they found that Fedex tube in Baghdad? Probably at home bursting blood vessels cheering on Dick Cheney as he changed his tune and said it's still worth it to blow the economy and kill thousands of American kids just to get rid of Saddam. The outrage over four dead diplos while we're still recovering from the most incredible amount of bullshit to ever emanate from the White House is staggering.

You guys must all be from Cleveland with the size of your testicles, cuz it takes big balls to show no shame for Iraq while you go apeshit on Benghazi. I find it simply stunning at what a joke the GOP has made of itself, being lead by the peepee by Fox News. You guys are like a rabid dog that won't let go of the bait even as the trap snaps shut around your neck.

Please carry on, so much fun to watch.


User currently offlinebhill From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 952 posts, RR: 0
Reply 68, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1832 times:

"Liberalism is truly a mental disorder..." Right, then how about:

Todd Akin: “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways of shutting that whole thing down” - mid 2012 Senate Campaign

Clayton Williams: “If it’s inevitable, just relax and enjoy it” - mid 1990 Gubernatorial race in Texas

Chuck Winder: “I would hope that when a woman goes in to a physician with a rape issue, that physician will indeed ask her about perhaps her marriage, was this pregnancy caused by normal relations in a marriage or was it truly caused by a rape. I assume that’s part of the counseling that goes on.” - March 2012

Ken Buck: “A jury could very well conclude that this is a case of buyer’s remorse … It appears to me … you invited him over… the appearance is of consent.” - October 2010

Rick Santorum: “I think the right approach is to accept this horribly created — in the sense of rape — but nevertheless a gift in a very broken way, the gift of human life, and accept what God has given to you… rape victims should make the best of a bad situation.” - January, 2012

Yeah, us liberals have a mental disorder.

And you scoff at us for calling Bengazi "hearings" a witch hunt when YOUR fellow conservatives have reasoning skills like that? No wonder you lost the election!!!



Carpe Pices
User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 69, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1802 times:

From today's press briefing at the White House, led by Jay Carney:

• E-mails released by ABC News today were released to Congress last fall as part of the confirmation process for the new CIA director;

CIA changed talking points due to conflicting info on what could be confirmed;

• "A lot of agencies" weighed in on the talking points;

• Talking points initially "went further than evidence suggested." "We did not jump to conclusions" on responsibility;

• Talking points are baseline of what can be said at a point in time, not a recitation of facts;

• Benghazi edits were leaked for political reasons; and

• In their accusations, it's never been clear what the Republicans think the administration did that was wrong.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21521 posts, RR: 55
Reply 70, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1598 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 90):
It was very clearly implied, the whole "spike the football" thing.

The "spike the football" thing was a GOP creation, as a reaction to the implausible idea that a Democrat wouldn't be able to score successes against terrorism. Which is what getting Bin Laden was - an important success, but nobody in the administration ever said it was the end of the line.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 71, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1581 times:

The right wing is still insisting that "terrorist" and "extremist" are two completely different things and, because the CIA said one thing, Obama needs to be impeached because the CIA didn't say the other.

Also, how about deep and expensive investigations on the terror/extremist attacks under GWB? How about trying to bring him to justice for the terror/extremist attacks on our diplomats and diplomatic facilities?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-ce...ghazis-that-occurre_b_3246847.html

BTW, where are the jobs these right-wingers are so obsessed with creating for the American people? What about their patriotic duty to get us working again and get the economy humming again? What happened to that? Where are the jobs they promised us?



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinerightrudder From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 158 posts, RR: 0
Reply 72, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1385 times:

My take on it? If it would of been considered an Act of Terrorism instead of just an Islamic YouTube video. Peoples lives would of been saved. Who is the one that will volunteer and explain to the families of the dead that it was because of YouTube.


"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana".
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 73, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1344 times:

Quoting rightrudder (Reply 72):
My take on it? If it would of been considered an Act of Terrorism instead of just an Islamic YouTube video. Peoples lives would of been saved. Who is the one that will volunteer and explain to the families of the dead that it was because of YouTube.

There are reports that the ambassador himself said they didn't need more security in Benghzai when more security was offered.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...-security-report-article-1.1345119

And, still the right is screaming that, the next morning, Obama said it was becuase of a Youtube video.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and...-speaks-attack-benghazi#transcript

Where? Where does Obama say it was all because of a Youtube video?



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8188 posts, RR: 8
Reply 74, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1341 times:

Quoting rightrudder (Reply 72):
If it would of been considered an Act of Terrorism instead of just an Islamic YouTube video.

We tend to trivialize the YouTube video, but that video had resulted in Muslims becoming very offended and demonstrations/riots.

Personally I believe it could have been a combination of both. Terrorists well supported by those highly offended by the video.

Quoting rightrudder (Reply 72):
Peoples lives would of been saved.

And how many lives could have been saved if we had not been fed the BS about WMDs in Iraq? More Americans killed than in 9/11. Around 40,000 Purple Hearts awarded because of the Cheney/Rumsfeld Games. How many lies were we told.

Quoting rightrudder (Reply 72):
Who is the one that will volunteer and explain to the families of the dead that it was because of YouTube.

That video will continue to cause problems for non-Muslims in the future. It's a great recruiting tool for terrorists as well as being useful in stirring up a riot or two.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 37):
I call BS. For 2 weeks they tried to say it was not an organized terrorist attack - that it was simply a protest that got a bit carried away over some stupid video (the maker of which is still rotting in jail, by the way). The ONLY reason they did this was because the presidential election was weeks away, and they did not want to admit that terrorism was still a problem.

Let's get back to the CIA and it's Director at the time. Remember General Petraeus? The Golden Boy of the GOP? The guy had been discovered shagging his biographer before Benghazi and was in the middle of internal investigations, etc. when the attack on Benghazi occurred. So we have a Director of the CIA responsible for delivering "talking points"

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 66):

Fingers are being pointed at the CIA and White House regarding the progression of edits to the final version of the story re the Benghazi attack.

General Petraeus had something else pointing at the time, but the GOP won't touch that one with a stick(y).

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 69):
E-mails released by ABC News today were released to Congress last fall as part of the confirmation process for the new CIA director;

I guess the Republicans were too busy with the election to bother reading the emails. Same with ABC.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 69):
CIA changed talking points due to conflicting info on what could be confirmed;

And we know who was Director of the CIA at the time - and we know the "personal problems" he was going through.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 69):
Talking points are baseline of what can be said at a point in time, not a recitation of facts

That's actually an intelligent statement - for both sides of the aisle. Does the GOP really want to change that definition considering that the White House changes political parties over the years?


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8790 posts, RR: 24
Reply 75, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1334 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 73):
Where? Where does Obama say it was all because of a Youtube video?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_Qx7Fmn4uE



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineluckyone From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 2163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 76, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1281 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 2):
Somebody is going to have to explain to me why this would result in the impeachment of a President? People in the President's administration clearly screwed up which resulted in a real tragedy, and those people should be dealt with harshly (nothing less than being fired and never working for the government again)...but how does this prove that he has "lost his right to govern"?

Speaking only for myself, but after the Kennedy family turning a personal vendetta into a 50-year "problem" with Cuba, the Pentagon Papers, Watergate, Jimmy Carter discreetly funding what became the Taliban, Iran Contra, "Read my lips," Whitewater/Clinton's sexual liasons, WMDs, and now this business with Benghazi and the IRS, I'm of the opinion that anything and everything that looks funny and smells funny coming from the White House (and Congress for that matter) needs to pass a seriously skeptical smell test. After all, they are using my tax dollars for all this crap, why not hold them all accountable? Also, Whitewater in particular, IMHO, should have taught us that if something happens at the bottom rungs of an administration, it frequently has its roots at the top.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 2):
Second, why does anybody listen to anything Mike Huckabee has to say? I've listened to his show a couple times online, and the guy is totally out to lunch these days. There are so many better Republicans to get an opinion from, yet they choose Huckabee...

An excellent question. Though the answer is the "Family Values" crowd swoons for him. You know, the ones who believe in "traditional marriage," and have no problem with a 52% divorce rate.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 4):
Bush II had the biggest expansion of government ever. No one but no one on the far right said a word. They never stood up and DEMANDED Americans take up arms against the government. Oh, no. That would be disrespectful to the office!

I'm going to chalk that one up to partisan politics as usual. The same people who were squawking about Dubya's questionable policies are keeping completely mum about Obama's.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 5):

Now the same family values party just elected in South Carolina a man who left his wife and family for a Argentinean woman and has really shown no remorse.

Do as I say...not do as I do. I know better than you. Scroll down and click "Accept" and assume I know the Bible better than you.


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 77, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1234 times:

Quoting luckyone (Reply 76):
The same people who were squawking about Dubya's questionable policies are keeping completely mum about Obama's.

Bypassing FISA courts? Warrantless wiretapping?

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 75):
Quoting seb146 (Reply 73):Where? Where does Obama say it was all because of a Youtube video?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_Qx7Fmn4uE

The right will not admit what they are being shown. The right believes that the very first story is the only story to go with. The right thinks they are such great warriors they do not understand that terror attacks like this are fluid situations. First, the right says "Obama doesn't care about the dead Americans" even when they are shown he does care about the dead Americans. Then, they say "He didn't say 'act of terror' the first time" and, in the same breath, they say "he says it was all because of a video" not understanding the administration did not have all the facts.

The right wants so badly to rush to judgment over anything that happens. The right will only think in that way. The right does not want facts. They just want action. When it comes time to pay the piper, they, then, turn around and blame Democrats.

This is why I am sick and tired of this disgusting behavior.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8790 posts, RR: 24
Reply 78, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1225 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 77):
The right will not admit what they are being shown. The right believes that the very first story is the only story to go with. The right thinks they are such great warriors they do not understand that terror attacks like this are fluid situations. First, the right says "Obama doesn't care about the dead Americans" even when they are shown he does care about the dead Americans. Then, they say "He didn't say 'act of terror' the first time" and, in the same breath, they say "he says it was all because of a video" not understanding the administration did not have all the facts.

You forgot to mention we eat babies and use immigrants for skeet practice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk47saogI8o



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineluckyone From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 2163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 79, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1206 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 77):
Quoting luckyone (Reply 76):
The same people who were squawking about Dubya's questionable policies are keeping completely mum about Obama's.

Bypassing FISA courts? Warrantless wiretapping?

I said it was politics as usual. I didn't say it was right, or that either side's complains were completely unjustified. You cannot separate a politician and the political gamesmanship that is Washington, and part of that reality is making a fuss about the "other guy" while toeing the line with your own guy until plausible deniability goes out the window a la Richard Nixon in '74. It's quite easy to see how that very quickly becomes an issue in a two-party system. It's one of the many reasons I would prefer a multi-party system. We certainly have the population to support it. Obviously that isn't going to happen anytime soon, but hey, hope springs eternal.

Also, partly because of the media (multiple factions), the last two Presidents have been operating in an environment whereby people are taking any and all challenges and questions as a personal affront, which to me is stupid. So your guy got put in the White House. Great. That just means now he's extra-accountable and even less worthy of my blind trust and more prone to questioning. In my humble opinion, many people were so desperate after Bush (not without reason) that they fell hook, line, and sinker for the hopey change rhetoric and over the moon promises of the 2008 Obama campaign. What they get is more politics as usual and a White House that has been described by some White House correspondents as more controlling of information and the press than even the Nixon administration.


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 80, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1160 times:

Quoting luckyone (Reply 79):
partly because of the media (multiple factions), the last two Presidents have been operating in an environment whereby people are taking any and all challenges and questions as a personal affront

Media is not about informing anymore. Since Reagan, media is about money. Ratings. The bigger scandal and louder outrage, the more ads they can sell. The more yelling a person does, the better for ratings, the more money the company brings in.

Quoting luckyone (Reply 79):
a White House that has been described by some White House correspondents as more controlling of information and the press than even the Nixon administration.

huh.... And, yet, tons of information goes out. Sounds pretty controlling to me!



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8790 posts, RR: 24
Reply 81, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1080 times:

Some Mea Culpas coming out...

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-...-made-mistakes-but-without-malice/

Quote:
"We're portrayed by Republicans as either being lying or idiots," said one Obama administration official who was part of the Benghazi response. "It's actually closer to us being idiots."



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Moto GP Season Starts Today posted Sun Mar 26 2006 10:22:17 by Andz
Hurricane Season Starts Today! posted Wed Jun 1 2005 16:40:48 by Cumulonimbus
Judge Moore's Ethic's Trial Starts Today posted Wed Nov 12 2003 16:00:13 by Alpha 1
Italian EU Presidency Starts Today... posted Wed Jul 2 2003 14:40:10 by Turin_airport
Elf Oil Company Corruption Trial Starts Today posted Mon Mar 17 2003 10:05:51 by Cfalk
World Cup: Second Round Starts Today posted Sat Jun 15 2002 06:57:55 by Goodbye
CNN Vs BBC Vs Al-Jazeera Vs Russia Today? posted Tue Apr 23 2013 05:03:07 by AA7295
Barack Obama's Speech Today In Jerusalem posted Thu Mar 21 2013 09:30:02 by Gonzalo
Conclave Starts 03.12.2013 posted Fri Mar 8 2013 15:11:35 by luv2fly
Two Accidents To Cruise Ships Today posted Sun Feb 10 2013 15:21:33 by EY460