Benghazi

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.
alpuz
Senior Member
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Benghazi

Postby alpuz » Fri May 10, 2013 11:58 pm

You're linking to pjmedia, Leroy. What's next, twitchy?

Leroy Gates
Forum Addict
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 11:09 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby Leroy Gates » Sat May 11, 2013 12:03 am

"MR. CARNEY: Jake, let’s be clear, these protests were in reaction to a video that had spread to the region --

Q At Benghazi? What happened at Benghazi --

MR. CARNEY: We certainly don't know. We don't know otherwise. We have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack. The unrest we’ve seen around the region has been in reaction to a video that Muslims, many Muslims find offensive. And while the violence is reprehensible and unjustified, it is not a reaction to the 9/11 anniversary that we know of, or to U.S. policy.

Q But the group around the Benghazi post was well armed. It was a well-coordinated attack. Do you think it was a spontaneous protest against a movie?

MR. CARNEY: Look, this is obviously under investigation, and I don’t have –

Q But your operating assumption is that that was in response to the video, in Benghazi? I just want to clear that up. That’s the framework? That’s the operating assumption?

MR. CARNEY: Look, it’s not an assumption --

Q Because there are administration officials who don’t -- who dispute that, who say that it looks like this was something other than a protest.

MR. CARNEY: I think there has been news reports on this, Jake, even in the press, which some of it has been speculative. What I’m telling you is this is under investigation. The unrest around the region has been in response to this video."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/14/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-9142012

alpuz
Senior Member
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Benghazi

Postby alpuz » Sat May 11, 2013 12:06 am

That's fine and dandy, Leroy.. what was your point?

Leroy Gates
Forum Addict
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 11:09 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby Leroy Gates » Sat May 11, 2013 12:24 am

I was responding to this statement from Huckleby. I don't agree they were all in response to the video, Cairo and Benghazi for example.

Huckleby wrote:1) There were 35 embassy protests across the muslim world, many of them violent, all of them in response to the video.

Do you understand and agree with this statement?


We now know the episode was reported as an "attack" by the people on the ground but was changed to a "demonstration" by other people who's motives appear blatantly political.

The "chronology was reversed" defense is amusing.

alpuz
Senior Member
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Benghazi

Postby alpuz » Sat May 11, 2013 12:44 am

Clear heads in chaos, Leroy.. you the man for the job? You've got one thing right tonight, the 'by other people who's motives appear blatantly political' angle.

Team twitchy sells one hell of a product, buyer. Good luck luck hucking this horseshit. Reince and Mitt are strangely silent.

Leroy Gates
Forum Addict
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 11:09 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby Leroy Gates » Sat May 11, 2013 1:28 am

"I think its hilarious that the GOP thinks this is a real issue." DCB
May 6

"No wonder mainstream media aren't picking it up. There's nothing to pick."
Snoqueen May 9


" ABCNEWS:
Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference"

"MSNBC Reporting Anxiety and Panic in Democrat Ranks Over Benghazi Cover-up Revelations"

" CNN's Borger: Benghazi Talking Points ‘Were Edited to the Point of Inaccuracy’

"BBC: After Benghazi revelations, heads will roll"

"Washington Post: Benghazi e-mails show State Dept., CIA clashed"

"New York Times: E-Mails About Benghazi Put White House on Defensive"

"LA Times: White House emails raise new questions on Libya attack"

"The Guardian: White House under renewed criticism after leaked Benghazi emails"

"Huffington Post: White House Slammed Over Secret Benghazi Briefing"

"Huffington Post: Emails Show State Department Sought To Change Benghazi Talking Points"

alpuz
Senior Member
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Benghazi

Postby alpuz » Sat May 11, 2013 1:31 am

Yo, Leroy.. what do you think would have been an appropriate response? Spell it out.

Leroy Gates
Forum Addict
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 11:09 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby Leroy Gates » Sat May 11, 2013 1:44 am

wack wack wrote:
Talon Newsman wrote:Now look at what these un-American leftists are trying to counter with:

Image

This can't possibly be true.

Can it?


Hey Meade, we know more about Benghazi then do we do all these other attacks combined... how about stretching your curiosity a bit?


"NSOM Says:
May 10th, 2013 at 3:39 pm
re #2
Most of those deaths are host country security forces or the attackers themselves. The premise of the graphic is also either mind numbingly stupid or intentionally disingenuous. The outrage over Benghazi isn’t that the attack happened, it’s that security requests were ignored, help wasn’t sent and, perhaps most crucially, there was a subsequent cover up of the attacks. In fact it was the reality as most Republicans understand it, that the world is filled with Islamist terrorists who will attack us any chance they get, that lead to the cover up of this attack. There isn’t outrage that it happened, it’s outrage that the Obama administration refused to admit the continuity as evidenced by the attacks in that very graphic."
http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=35549&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

alpuz
Senior Member
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Benghazi

Postby alpuz » Sat May 11, 2013 1:48 am

Who's thisainthell.us? Friends of yours, Leroy? Cool heads in a time of crises? You know, people we as a nation want running shit when chaos ensues, if and when if ever does?

Leroy Gates
Forum Addict
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 11:09 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby Leroy Gates » Sat May 11, 2013 1:55 am

alpuz wrote:Yo, Leroy.. what do you think would have been an appropriate response? Spell it out.


Obviously the appropriate response would be to blame the producer of an obscure video that had nothing to do with the attack while ignoring the Commander in Chief's direct order to do all that was necessary to secure the personnel on the ground. Why? Are you questioning our leaders?

alpuz
Senior Member
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Benghazi

Postby alpuz » Sat May 11, 2013 2:00 am

Goodnight, Leroy. May the ghost of breitbart be with you.. you fuckin' knucklehead.

Leroy Gates
Forum Addict
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 11:09 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby Leroy Gates » Sat May 11, 2013 2:03 am

Enjoy your hangover.

snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 12960
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby snoqueen » Sat May 11, 2013 2:47 am

The outrage over Benghazi isn’t that the attack happened, it’s that security requests were ignored, help wasn’t sent and, perhaps most crucially, there was a subsequent cover up of the attacks.


That is,

1) security requests that were not fullfilled (that's not to say ignored) because of insufficient funds available to adequately protect all US posts, annexes, and embassies in dangerous parts of the world;

2) help that could never have arrived in time; and

3) a coverup visible only to the writer of that blog and his buddies, while the rest of us saw very thorough coverage emerging over time.

If the lack of funds to protect our international outposts is important, why would the President and his staff try to conceal what happened? In a rational world, they'd want to highlight it to persuade the public (and their elected officials) that more money is needed and we are thus obligated to raise that money by the usual means (responsible and accountable taxation for a defined purpose). In other words, he'd do the exact opposite of covering up the results of the underfunding. He'd be acting against his own interests to hide it.

Do you read/listen to news from only one source? That could be the problem. You, as part of the public, need to be actively engaged not just a passive consumer of "news."

I will not be nursing a hangover tomorrow, either. I'm merely nocturnal.

Sandi
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2612
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 11:31 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby Sandi » Sat May 11, 2013 4:48 am

snoqueen wrote:If the lack of funds to protect our international outposts is important, why would the President and his staff try to conceal what happened? In a rational world, they'd want to highlight it to persuade the public (and their elected officials) that more money is needed and we are thus obligated to raise that money by the usual means (responsible and accountable taxation for a defined purpose). In other words, he'd do the exact opposite of covering up the results of the underfunding. He'd be acting against his own interests to hide it.


Indeed. I have to agree one hundred percent.

The fact that the President didn't "highlight it to persuade the public" ( by your theory ) says that it wasn't lack of funds at all. Which leads to the next question: was the reason, at least in part, to cover lack of any decision to provide security?

From testimony at the House hearings, it looks like much of it was just that: to cover Clinton's ass.

Leroy Gates
Forum Addict
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 11:09 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby Leroy Gates » Sat May 11, 2013 7:20 am

Leroy Gates wrote:"I think its hilarious that the GOP thinks this is a real issue." DCB
May 6

"No wonder mainstream media aren't picking it up. There's nothing to pick."
Snoqueen May 9


" ABCNEWS:
Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference"

"MSNBC Reporting Anxiety and Panic in Democrat Ranks Over Benghazi Cover-up Revelations"

" CNN's Borger: Benghazi Talking Points ‘Were Edited to the Point of Inaccuracy’

"BBC: After Benghazi revelations, heads will roll"

"Washington Post: Benghazi e-mails show State Dept., CIA clashed"

"New York Times: E-Mails About Benghazi Put White House on Defensive"

"LA Times: White House emails raise new questions on Libya attack"

"The Guardian
: White House under renewed criticism after leaked Benghazi emails"

"Huffington Post: White House Slammed Over Secret Benghazi Briefing"

"Huffington Post: Emails Show State Department Sought To Change Benghazi Talking Points"


snoqueen wrote:Do you read/listen to news from only one source? That could be the problem.


Return to “National Politics & Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests