^ You're wasting your time Canuck.
He lives in a bubble.
^ You're wasting your time Canuck.
He lives in a bubble.
Never regret anything, because in that moment it's exactly what you wanted.
I think it's time for the CEP 85% to start reading the news and acting like inquisitive intellectuals.
Your unabashed loyalty to Obama is blinding you.
All you seem to be able to do it attack the people (like Chance and Saucy) who are asking responsible questions and talking about the issue.
The links are easy to read guys -- the ones on ABC, CNN, CBS, NBC. Forget FOX.
There are questions that the Administration refuses to answer ... the media is waking up (I hope).
Apparently only Chance, Springer, Sausy and Reardon are able to process 'information'. Only they and FOX are above 'baseless attacks'. The rest of us will just have to muddle along somehow.
Oh the irony.
You're posting on a message board, for FREE that supports GAY PORN!
DUH!I don't see any interest at all in getting to the truth of Benghazi. No interest in a dead Ambassador, no interest in why the US military was ordered not to come to the aid of Americans in trouble.
Do you think that my neighbors, my friends, and my family are going to get any answers in West, Texas?
How many "innocents" died under Bush43?
Because the Democrats...like always...just sit on their thumbs.
The reason why Benghazi doesn't stick is because most Americans don't give a shit.
They see and recognize everyday that our elected representatives are bought and paid for by "corporate america."
Behghazi is an in-house talking point in Washington, District of Columbia.
Nothing outside of New York Citiy, or LA matters.
Except little winy ass bitches who live near New York City, or cute Latino boys who lived in the Suburbs of Lost Angel ease...who don't post here anymore,
Never regret anything, because in that moment it's exactly what you wanted.
ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE
The republicans and their mouthpiece Fox News shamefully politicized the deaths.
If you can't see that then you're really blinded by your hate.
new day - good day - sunny in glamourous astoria - trader joes run done - brunch with mom soon
unfortunately while it's a new day - it's the same BS from the gang that follows the narrative w/o actually reading much less investigating
we have people who trash heroes on the ground - in libya - one who died - others who were involved prior to/during/after the terror attack - he says they suck
we have others who derail threads with bush this bush that
and other who just types BENGHAZI !!!!
this constitutes critical thought it appears
well, critical thought is something else - and here's some of it for ya - happy mothers day from a mother and a smart lady
a couple of pearls but not nearly enough so see if u can spare some time to read it - think about it - perhaps chat about it
vs. what you've been doing
cheers and happy mothers day to all
this week the fog has lifted - for those interested in seeing that is -
this admin is not very good at getting things done for the american people but they do run a good campaign - that we knowThe Benghazi story until now has been a jumble of factoids that didn't quite cohere, didn't produce a story that people could absorb and hold in their minds. This week that changed. Three State Department officials testifying under oath to a House committee changed it, by adding information that gave form to a growing picture. Gregory Hicks, Mark Thompson and Eric Nordstrom were authoritative and credible. You knew you were hearing the truth as they saw and experienced it. Not one of them seemed political. You had no sense of how they voted. They were professionals. They'd seen a bad thing. They came forward to tell the story. They put the lie to the idea that all questioning of Obama administration actions in Benghazi are partisan and low.
why couldn't they just tell the truth ?The Obama White House sees every event as a political event. Really, every event, even an attack on a consulate and the killing of an ambassador. Because of that, it could not tolerate the idea that the armed assault on the Benghazi consulate was a premeditated act of Islamist terrorism. That would carry a whole world of unhappy political implications, and demand certain actions. And the American presidential election was only eight weeks away. They wanted this problem to go away, or at least to bleed the meaning from it.
this week's testimony from 3 respected and credible witnesses - non political ones - provided CLARITYBecause they didn't want this attack dominating the headline with an election coming. It would open the administration to criticism of its intervention in Libya. President Obama had supported overthrowing Moammar Gadhafi and put U.S. force behind the Libyan rebels. Now Libyans were killing our diplomats. Was our policy wrong? More importantly, the administration's efforts against al Qaeda would suddenly come under scrutiny and questioning. The president, after the killing of Osama bin Laden, had taken to suggesting al Qaeda was over. Al Qaeda was done. But if an al Qaeda offshoot in Libya was killing our diplomats, the age of terrorism was not over.
how funny (not really) that at the beginning it was too early to talk about ...... and perhaps that's true and now it's old news per Jay Carney - who must want to quit in the worst way no ?This week's testimony from Messrs. Hicks, Thompson and Nordstrom was clarifying, to say the least.
Mr. Hicks, deputy chief of mission at the time of the attack, said the YouTube video was never an event in Libya, and no one in Benghazi or Tripoli saw what was happening as a spontaneous street protest. Beth Jones, the acting assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, sent an email on Sept. 12 saying: "The group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists." Mr. Hicks himself said he spoke to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at 2 a.m. Benghazi time the day after the attack and told her it was a planned attack, not a street protest.
a great read gents - enjoy with your breakfastFrom the day of the attack until this week, the White House spin was too clever by half. In the weeks and months after the attack White House spokesmen said they were investigating the story, an internal review was under way. When the story blew open again, last week, they said it was too far in the past: "Benghazi happened a long time ago." Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, really said that.
You have no idea what you're talking about man. It appears you only listen to what you agree with and don't have an open mind.
The story is beyond what FOX covers ... read about it on ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, The New York Times and other newspapers.
Putting you head in a hole will not let this story go away. The Administration is going to have to answer questions regarding what happened and why the responded in the way they did.
I couldn't give a fuck about the future of Hillary Clinton -- she's 65 -- an old woman with vision problems who I doubt will have the ability to run for office at age 69.
Nice try Robert -- let's talk facts not conspiracy theories.
The only way that Benghazi can hurt Obama and Hillary is if they don't come clean and tell us all what happened.
Just what exactly is the scandal all about anyway? Exactly what terrible thing did Hillary Clinton and President Obama do that has the right wing up in such a tizzy they can't see clearly?
It's shameful republicans and the right wing are exploiting these deaths to attack their political enemies. Republicans exploit a lot of tragedies for supposed political gain.
2. ordered a rescue team to stand down;
3. tried to lay the blame on a video;
4. lied about everything, then lied about having lied;
If either Bill Clinton or George Bush had been president when this cover-up happened, the Obama media would have gone into a feeding frenzy.
Why isn't there as much effort to get the ones who did the attacks than pointing fingers at the President and former Secretary of State? I don't see anything about the attackers.
So you see why everyone knows this Benghazi "scandal" is nothing more than an exploitation of the death of an American ambassador and 3 others by republicans to discredit the Obama and Clinton. Republicans say nothing about the attackers.
The scandal is the politicization of these deaths by republicans.
I just saw Obama say again, and again, that the same thing as said before was said again. The Attackers need to be found and tried. There is nothing but GOP talking about Oama and Clinton to discredit them, especially Clinton since she will most likely be the Presidential candidate and will win, win, win, no matter what the GOOP says. There, that was a typing error, but I'm not gonna correct it. GOOP looks good.
Besides, it must be good as GOOP is in my spell check.. There!
BEWARE! Harassing the Indian may result in sudden and severe hair loss.
I tweeted to Paul Ryan recently. "WHy don't you fund embassy security instead of using dead bodies for political footballs. #disgrace"
He didnt respond the fucking weasel.
omg. how much longer lord? how much longer?
The one thing that I would point out to those who seek to weaken Hilary's chances. Scandals don't touch her....they make her stronger.
Years from now just how bankrupt of character Barack Obama is will be evident to just about everyone with a modicum of honesty or sense. History will likely be unkind to Bush too, but the here and now is Obama and as I've compared him before he's the Wizard of Oz of American politics. Go to him for hope, change, renewal, righting all that is wrong with the country..the world even!!!!!!!!!! But open the curtain and he's just con man Professor Marvel, getting away with his act until the curtains drew ad the charade was exposed. The curtains are drawing on the President, but too many still mesmerized by his act are loking in the oher direction and allowing him an escape to elude and fool again.
unofficial official mini meet Friday- Saturday April 11-12, 2014
Finally a little transparency ... it's a start.
White House releases Benghazi e-mails
I learned that ABC was a shill for the GOP. That the ABC reporter did not see the e-mails he quoted for his "scoop"; the quotes were supplied by a GOP operative. Surprise!!!
Now, what about the scandal of the press lying?
Did you learn that from Rachel Maddow or Lawrence O'Donnell?
I believe that Hilary Clinton, if she wants to be, will be President in 2016. Her popularity polling numbers are off the chart compared to other potential candidates.
It was no coincidence that she did not wish to remain in the second Obama term as a cabinet secretary. By the time the next presidential cycle begins in 2015, the Benghazi truth will be known. They will try and try to smear her, but she'll be time enough for any of the repubs nonsense.
Last edited by MisterB; May 16th, 2013 at 11:35 AM.
It's like Clinton. They want to find something,anything to throw at Obama so they can get rid of him.
It's like Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43. They want to find something .. anything to throw at them so they can get rid of them.
The FBI is still investigating. Will they still be investigating 3 years from now? I'm guessing yes.
It's a sad day to be political. Shows lack of class...
That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
- Gene Wolfe
I haven’t been successful in discovering much of substance about this, but invite additional commentary.
It appears that there may have been an effort to purchase these (and other such weapons) from entities in Libya – perhaps similar to a “gun buyback program” here in the US. If true, that part of the equation seems reasonable to me.Twenty-five countries, including the United States, produce man-portable air defense systems. [Wiki]
I am somewhat mystified that the report written by former US special service operatives is not available online without paying a fee. If the information it reveals is indubitably important and helpful, it seems that it should be offered to the general public freely and without constraint. There are certainly excerpts and quotes online, but why not make the whole thing available? As I understand, it is only 75 pages.
At any rate, it is perhaps important to denote the significance of the possible/alleged transfer of MANPADS to Syrian opposition forces. If true, would that represent a breach of protocol and if so, how?
The lid on the CIA component of the Benghazi is being kept very tight.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...hazi-secrets/#“Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency’s missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency’s workings,” the bombshell report reveals. “The goal of the questioning, according to sources, is to find out if anyone is talking to the media or Congress.”
http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08...nghazi-attack/Speculation on Capitol Hill has included the possibility the U.S. agencies operating in Benghazi were secretly helping to move surface-to-air missiles out of Libya, through Turkey, and into the hands of Syrian rebels.
(To me, Capitol Hill speculation is a way of saying the state of affairs under the table.)
2. We get the arms out of Libya.
3. We get the arms to Syria, which gets weapons from Russia, and thus there is familiarity with the weapon and needed parts and ammunition.
4. If the conflict subsides, the arms may well pivot vs. Russian interests.
5. See Iran Contra.
6. If we put no "no-fly" into effect, the only aircraft to engage are Syrian.
7 We know their operational characteristics but have not disclosed ours.