HomeFairfax General ForumArrest/Ticket SearchWiki newPictures/VideosChatArticlesLinksAbout
Off-Topic :  Fairfax Underground fairfax underground logo
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Love bamma ()
Date: September 21, 2013 09:37AM

These attacks occurred when George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were allegedly “keeping us safe.”




June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al-Qaida attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.

October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of “Bali Bombings.” No fatalities.

February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.

May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al-Qaida terrorists storm the diplomatic compound killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.

July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.

December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al-Qaida terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.

March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name “David Foy.” This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what’s considered American soil.)

September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting “Allahu akbar” storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.

January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.

March 18, 2008. Sana’a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaida-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.

July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.

September 17, 2008. Sana’a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had been married for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.


http://thedailybanter.com/2013/05/13-benghazis-that-occurred-on-bushs-watch-without-a-peep-from-fox-news/

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Sharonista ()
Date: September 21, 2013 09:58AM

Great post, excusing obamas failures by pointing out Bushs.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Reality: Conservative's Enemy ()
Date: September 21, 2013 10:09AM

Sharonista Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Great post, excusing obamas failures by pointing
> out Bushs.

Actually, it's a great post because it points out the hypocrisy that conservatives so willingly embrace.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Sharonista ()
Date: September 21, 2013 10:11AM

no you failed in your attempt to excuse one stupid act by pointing out another.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Reality: Conservative's Enemy ()
Date: September 21, 2013 10:16AM

Sharonista Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> no you failed in your attempt to excuse one stupid
> act by pointing out another.

Correction: 13 others.

Where was the outrage? Why weren't there any congressional hearings?

I guess you can't expect consistency from the grand 'ole party of double standards and hypocrisy.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: BEH ()
Date: September 21, 2013 10:24AM

Excellent point made by the OP.

Proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that all politicians are full of shit, and run for office to help only themselves, and could give a shit about the clueless sycophants that elect them.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Sharonista ()
Date: September 21, 2013 10:36AM

Reality: Conservative's Enemy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sharonista Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > no you failed in your attempt to excuse one
> stupid
> > act by pointing out another.
>
> Correction: 13 others.
>
> Where was the outrage? Why weren't there any
> congressional hearings?
>
> I guess you can't expect consistency from the
> grand 'ole party of double standards and
> hypocrisy.

You are a sad person. If my neighbor runs over my dog he can excuse it by saying last week the other neighbor ran over my cat. Get it.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Sharonista ()
Date: September 21, 2013 10:39AM

BEH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Excellent point made by the OP.

The only point the op has is on the top of his head. One stupid act does not excuse future stupid acts regardless of who is in charge. Its like a childs excuse "Well he gets away with it".

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Reality: Conservative's Enemy ()
Date: September 21, 2013 10:57AM

Sharonista Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You are a sad person. If my neighbor runs over my
> dog he can excuse it by saying last week the other
> neighbor ran over my cat. Get it.

Sigh... I can't believe you just compared foreign policy and security issues to running over a dog.

You can pull out bad analogies all day, but that doesn't change the fact that the GOP was only out to "slander" Obama's name. Republicans showed no desire to further probe security breaches when they happened under the administration of one of their own. The definition of hypocrisy.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Vexxxed ()
Date: September 21, 2013 11:38AM

So what happens when Obama hits the 13 magic number?

Do we get a prize for putting up with TWO assholes (three if you include the OP) or is that when the internment camps open up because no one complained?

Ed, may I call you Ed? You MUST be Ed Schultz because you pull these comparisons out of your ass just like he does. And you ignore the fact that (look up the numbers dipshit...again) no one was happy with Bush when it was on his watch either.

Comes with the job. If Obama can't handle it, let him step down.

Or where you just trying to pull off a preemptive strike in excusing the Muslim in the White House for not doing anything about this?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2427892/Nairobi-mall-Gunmen-massacred-22-Kenyan-shopping-centre-targeted-non-Islamics.html
Attachments:
943247_490473561030285_1061281601_n.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: TheTruth ()
Date: September 21, 2013 12:20PM

1. Has the Obama Administration cited these 13 examples?
2. Did the Bush Administration cover them up?
3. Were the 13 incidences reported in the press as a cover-up keeping in mind the press is more favorable to Obama than Bush?
4. The press is reporting a suspected cover-up (Benghazi) not an incidence of terrorism though that may be a motivational factor.

The argument that "Bush did it so can we" seems to be the clarion call of progressives who prefer a weak social agenda over a strong USA. Bush made a lot of mistakes. So far, Obama's legacy is he doubled down on all of them then blamed Bush. Progressives are too intellectually shallow to recognize this.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Yeah, we get it ()
Date: September 21, 2013 12:26PM

Sharonista Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You are a sad person. If my neighbor runs over my
> dog he can excuse it by saying last week the other
> neighbor ran over my cat. Get it.

HAHAHAHAHA! What a fucking moron.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: LOL! ()
Date: September 21, 2013 12:38PM

Ambassadors killed serving under Bush? Zero

Ambassadors killed serving under Obama? One

Libtards are soooooo silly LOL

 
Attachments:
bengahzi.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: abelard ()
Date: September 21, 2013 12:58PM

>The press is reporting a suspected cover-up

By 'the press' you mean 'Fox', and by 'suspected cover-up' you mean 'GOP fishing expedition'. Honestly, I could give a crap about the GOP or Obama, but I think the hypocrisy over Benghazi is truly extraordinary. I'd be more depressed by this were it not for the Fox follow-up 'scandal': why is nobody but Fox outraged by the fact that nobody but Fox is 'outraged'?

As a guy who really believes the dems need solid opposition to hold them in check over their own stupidities, I'm actually worried about this. When did the GOP turn into such ineffectual whining pussies? And they're about to shut down the government over defunding Obamacare (what is this, the 38th attempt, or 39th?) and it's gonna backfire on them massively.

>The argument that "Bush did it so can we" ...

Is a direct result of making the daily, and I do mean daily, claim that 'Obama is the WORST PRESIDENT EVER' over pretty much anything that happens. 'Worst' compared to whom - it's a fair question.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: LOL! ()
Date: September 21, 2013 01:06PM

abelard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >The press is reporting a suspected cover-up
>
> By 'the press' you mean 'Fox', and by 'suspected
> cover-up' you mean 'GOP fishing expedition'.
> Honestly, I could give a crap about the GOP or
> Obama, but I think the hypocrisy over Benghazi is
> truly extraordinary. I'd be more depressed by
> this were it not for the Fox follow-up 'scandal':
> why is nobody but Fox outraged by the fact that
> nobody but Fox is 'outraged'?
>
> As a guy who really believes the dems need solid
> opposition to hold them in check over their own
> stupidities, I'm actually worried about this. When
> did the GOP turn into such ineffectual whining
> pussies? And they're about to shut down the
> government over defunding Obamacare (what is this,
> the 38th attempt, or 39th?) and it's gonna
> backfire on them massively.
>
> >The argument that "Bush did it so can we" ...
>
> Is a direct result of making the daily, and I do
> mean daily, claim that 'Obama is the WORST
> PRESIDENT EVER' over pretty much anything that
> happens. 'Worst' compared to whom - it's a fair
> question.


Whining about whining. Libtards, LOL!

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: abelard ()
Date: September 21, 2013 01:14PM

>Whining about whining. Libtards, LOL!

Sigh. Sadly, you make my point.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2013 01:16PM by abelard.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: LOL! ()
Date: September 21, 2013 01:22PM

abelard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >Whining about whining. Libtards, LOL!
>
> Sigh. Sadly, you make my point.


Yes, you're a super genius all right. Whining and sighing on the Interwebz about partisan politics, but only about the republicans. Too smart for the rest of us, you are. LOL!

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: just because ()
Date: September 21, 2013 01:38PM

Reality: Conservative's Enemy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sharonista Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > no you failed in your attempt to excuse one
> stupid
> > act by pointing out another.
>
> Correction: 13 others.
>
> Where was the outrage? Why weren't there any
> congressional hearings?
>
> I guess you can't expect consistency from the
> grand 'ole party of double standards and
> hypocrisy.


Thats for sure.
Attachments:
fox stupid.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Liberal Logic 28 ()
Date: September 21, 2013 02:34PM

Reality: Conservative's Enemy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sharonista Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Great post, excusing obamas failures by
> pointing
> > out Bushs.
>
> Actually, it's a great post because it points out
> the hypocrisy that conservatives so willingly
> embrace.

Which one of those attacks were blamed on a youtube video?

Which one of those attacks werent called terrorism and instead jailed a US citizen for making a youtube video?

If you dont see anything wrong with lying about it to cover it up until after the election then youre the poster child for why not everyone should vote

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: way worse yet ()
Date: September 21, 2013 03:17PM

GW Bush also bears responsibility for the 1.5 million or more who were killed in the war he waged in Iraq.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: fairymanderer ()
Date: September 21, 2013 04:15PM

way worse yet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> GW Bush also bears responsibility for the 1.5
> million or more who were killed in the war he
> waged in Iraq.


Using your logic then Obama gets a free pass to start his own war. One stupid act excuses a future stupid act right? What a retard you are.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: abelard ()
Date: September 22, 2013 01:18AM

>Whining and sighing on the Interwebz about partisan politics, but only about the
>republicans. Too smart for the rest of us, you are. LOL!

That's sweet of you to say but I'm sure you're smart in your own way. Well, somewhat sure. Just try to articulate your arguments rather than your resentment for folks you think are smarter than you, and you'll be fine.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: CHILL ()
Date: September 22, 2013 01:55AM

Not calling Fort Hood a terrorist attack. There is another one for you. Worst President Ever. Excuses Excuses Excuses. He never takes the blame, lets blame Bush. What about his "my way or no way" mentality. Work together get this country back on track. Stop the BS>

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: True Blue ()
Date: September 22, 2013 12:26PM


Attachments:
Issa.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Fairy tales ()
Date: September 22, 2013 01:25PM

True Blue Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>

Tell us about the movie again.

lmao

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: pay tree it ()
Date: September 22, 2013 01:57PM

GWB's Benghazis are the least of his failures. The majority of the world see him as a Christian terrorist.

George W. Bush, in his unprovoked attack against the sovereign nation of Iraq, openly violated the UN Charter, to which the US is a signatory. The Charter's core principles contained in Article 2(4) and Article 51 prohibit one nation from attacking another except in self-defense or with the authority of the U.N. In effect, George Bush launched an unlawful use of force against persons and property.
The invasion launched by George W. Bush was heralded by the most frightening and powerful use of force and military violence in recent history.

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/george_w__bush_-_world_s_leadi.html

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Wolf Brigade, Abu Ghraib
Posted by: eLester ()
Date: September 22, 2013 02:23PM

Bush/Cheney, and Obama are also in violation of the Geneva conventions for torture centers and death squads in Iraq (and perhaps 75+ countries they've targeted under the War on Terror special executive order).

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/mar/07/donald-rumsfeld-iraqi-torture

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Free George Bush ()
Date: September 22, 2013 03:54PM

pay tree it Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> GWB's Benghazis are the least of his failures. The
> majority of the world see him as a Christian
> terrorist.
>
> George W. Bush, in his unprovoked attack against
> the sovereign nation of Iraq, openly violated the
> UN Charter, to which the US is a signatory. The
> Charter's core principles contained in Article
> 2(4) and Article 51 prohibit one nation from
> attacking another except in self-defense or with
> the authority of the U.N. In effect, George Bush
> launched an unlawful use of force against persons
> and property.
> The invasion launched by George W. Bush was
> heralded by the most frightening and powerful use
> of force and military violence in recent history.
>
> http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/george_w__bush_-_wo
> rld_s_leadi.html


Really. Let him out of your head.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Vexxxed ()
Date: September 22, 2013 08:23PM

True Blue Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
Attachments:
408519_223936661068359_290618640_n.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: TYhmm ()
Date: September 22, 2013 09:22PM

Love bamma Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> These attacks occurred when George W. Bush and
> Dick Cheney were allegedly “keeping us safe.”
>
>
>
>
> June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber
> connected with al-Qaida attacks the U.S.
> Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.
>
> October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S.
> diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of
> “Bali Bombings.” No fatalities.
>
> February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several
> gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are
> killed.
>
> May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al-Qaida
> terrorists storm the diplomatic compound killing
> 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants
> committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.
>
> July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide
> bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
> attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.
>
> December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al-Qaida
> terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the
> perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.
>
> March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide
> bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four
> people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was
> directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if
> Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize
> the name “David Foy.” This is the third
> Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what’s
> considered American soil.)
>
> September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed
> gunmen shouting “Allahu akbar” storm the U.S.
> Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car
> bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13
> are wounded.
>
> January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a
> Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary
> Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the
> U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.
>
> March 18, 2008. Sana’a, Yemen. Members of the
> al-Qaida-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a
> mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the
> embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.
>
> July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed
> terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people
> are killed.
>
> September 17, 2008. Sana’a, Yemen. Terrorists
> dressed as military officials attack the U.S.
> Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs
> and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are
> killed, including an American student and her
> husband (they had been married for three weeks
> when the attack occurred). This is the second
> attack on this embassy in seven months.
>
>
> http://thedailybanter.com/2013/05/13-benghazis-tha
> t-occurred-on-bushs-watch-without-a-peep-from-fox-
> news/


89 dead people

ALL "covered up" because the GOP did not invent "scandals" on a daily basis. I wonder why they hate the current POTUS so much, but let the previous one fuck up everything?

It is not a question of do 14 wrongs making a right, it is the obvious hypocrisy of the accusers.

Their hate for Obama takes away their ability to process reality.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Great story ()
Date: September 22, 2013 09:43PM

TYhmm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> 89 dead people
>
> ALL "covered up" because the GOP did not invent
> "scandals" on a daily basis. I wonder why they
> hate the current POTUS so much, but let the
> previous one fuck up everything?
>
> It is not a question of do 14 wrongs making a
> right, it is the obvious hypocrisy of the
> accusers.
>
> Their hate for Obama takes away their ability to
> process reality.


Tell us about the movie again.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: eWbGe ()
Date: September 23, 2013 01:34AM

Great story Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TYhmm Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > 89 dead people
> >
> > ALL "covered up" because the GOP did not invent
> > "scandals" on a daily basis. I wonder why they
> > hate the current POTUS so much, but let the
> > previous one fuck up everything?
> >
> > It is not a question of do 14 wrongs making a
> > right, it is the obvious hypocrisy of the
> > accusers.
> >
> > Their hate for Obama takes away their ability
> to
> > process reality.
>
>
> Tell us about the movie again.


What "movie"? The post is factual and precise, what part of the reality do you refuse to accept?

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Suzie says ()
Date: September 23, 2013 02:08AM

eWbGe Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Great story Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > TYhmm Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > >
> > > 89 dead people
> > >
> > > ALL "covered up" because the GOP did not
> invent
> > > "scandals" on a daily basis. I wonder why
> they
> > > hate the current POTUS so much, but let the
> > > previous one fuck up everything?
> > >
> > > It is not a question of do 14 wrongs making a
> > > right, it is the obvious hypocrisy of the
> > > accusers.
> > >
> > > Their hate for Obama takes away their ability
> > to
> > > process reality.
> >
> >
> > Tell us about the movie again.
>
>
> What "movie"? The post is factual and precise,
> what part of the reality do you refuse to accept?


This part....

0.jpg

and this part...

Screen%20shot%2020121219%20at%2024405%20

and this part...

Screen%20Shot%2020120920%20at%2091503%20

and this part...

libya15n-5-web.jpg

and this part...

Obama-Benghazi.jpg

and this part...

Videoasdf.jpg

and this part...

Hillary-Clinton-at-senate-015.jpg

and this part...

500x.jpg


among others...

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: birther ()
Date: September 23, 2013 12:06PM

No one with a brain thinks Benghazi was a scandle. The people who do care are the same ones that spent the first term of Barry claiming that the Congress, Senate and Legislative branches colluded to allow him proof of citizenship based on a counterfit birth certificate. 4 years of that. What do you expect?

I wanna know why we still have wire tapping, Gitmo and the wars

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Republican Failtards ()
Date: September 23, 2013 12:37PM

birther Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No one with a brain thinks Benghazi was a scandle.
> The people who do care are the same ones that
> spent the first term of Barry claiming that the
> Congress, Senate and Legislative branches colluded
> to allow him proof of citizenship based on a
> counterfit birth certificate. 4 years of that.
> What do you expect?
>
> I wanna know why we still have wire tapping, Gitmo
> and the wars

+1

it's a bunch of redneck teabagger nonsense. they're a bunch of ignorant shit-for-brains.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: nhkx4 ()
Date: September 23, 2013 12:41PM

Republican Failtards Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> birther Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > No one with a brain thinks Benghazi was a
> scandle.
> > The people who do care are the same ones that
> > spent the first term of Barry claiming that the
> > Congress, Senate and Legislative branches
> colluded
> > to allow him proof of citizenship based on a
> > counterfit birth certificate. 4 years of that.
>
> > What do you expect?
> >
> > I wanna know why we still have wire tapping,
> Gitmo
> > and the wars
>
> +1
>
> it's a bunch of redneck teabagger nonsense.
> they're a bunch of ignorant shit-for-brains.


Gerry, you're butthurt makes me happy.


.
Attachments:
I-Sense-Butthurt-75000244666.jpeg

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: man up and answer or STFU ()
Date: September 23, 2013 02:27PM

OP,

Which one of the aforementioned attacks killed the ambassador?

How many of those attacks were blamed on a YouTube video that nobody watched?

How many of those attacks did the Bush administration hesitate to call terrorist acts?

How many of those attacks left raw data and intelligence unsecured for days?

Waiting....

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Food For thought ()
Date: September 23, 2013 04:17PM

* On February 26, 1993 the north tower of the World Trade Center was bombed killing 6 people - President at the time Bill Clinton

* August 1998 bombings of US Embassy's in Kenya and Tanzania, responsibility linked to Osama bin Laden. 212 dead in Kenya, 4,000 wounded. 11 dead in Tanzania, 85 injured. President at the time Bill Clinton. America's military response...launch some cruise missiles into Sudan and Afghanistan destroying a pharmaceutical factory that provided 50% of medicine to the people of Sudan. The missile strike in Afghanistan was nothing more than a fireworks show. Side note, Clinton was in the midst of dealing with his Lewinsky scandal at this time.

* October 2000 USS Cole bombed. al-Qaeda claimed responsibility. President at the time Bill Clinton.

A stronger military response after any one of these events could have saved 3,000 lives on Sept 11 and reduced the overall death totals that have come since. Hindsight is always 20/20, but be willing to look at things from a fresh perspective and not republican VS democrat.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Econ 101 ()
Date: September 23, 2013 04:27PM

Hush... Bush never happened! That's all a figment of your imagination.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Liberal Logic 28 ()
Date: September 23, 2013 05:02PM

Econ 101 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hush... Bush never happened! That's all a
> figment of your imagination.


Which one?

That he never blamed a youtube video or that he never failed to call it exactly what it is a terrorist response?

Were all still waiting for those examples.

Continue on with your tired ass talking points ramblings now.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: answer them ()
Date: September 24, 2013 01:14AM

man up and answer or STFU Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OP,
>
> Which one of the aforementioned attacks killed the
> ambassador?
>
> How many of those attacks were blamed on a YouTube
> video that nobody watched?
>
> How many of those attacks did the Bush
> administration hesitate to call terrorist acts?
>
> How many of those attacks left raw data and
> intelligence unsecured for days?
>
> Waiting....


These are actually good questions. How come no Obama sycophant hasn't answered them really isn't surprising.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: answered again, we are done ()
Date: September 24, 2013 01:27AM

answer them Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> man up and answer or STFU Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > OP,
> >
> > Which one of the aforementioned attacks killed
> the
> > ambassador?

Three of them resulted in the death of the ambassador stationed there at the time.


> >
> > How many of those attacks were blamed on a
> YouTube
> > video that nobody watched?

None, and none have been since - speculation does not equal statement. GOP hysteria about a few hours and a few words is why you puke out the "youtube" crap.


> >
> > How many of those attacks did the Bush
> > administration hesitate to call terrorist acts?

Very few were even known about at the time. GOP hysteria about a few hours and a few words is why you puke out the same irrelevant crap.

> >
> > How many of those attacks left raw data and
> > intelligence unsecured for days?

Many, yet again, until the past few years, the 13 attacks and 89 dead people were just the result of "doing business as usual". GOP hysteria about a few hours and a few words is why you are concerned about what was left behind.


> >
> > Waiting....

You wait is over.
>
>
> These are actually good questions. How come no
> Obama sycophant hasn't answered them really isn't
> surprising.


We have not answered for a few reasons:

1. The entire idea of this 1 attack being a "scandal" is fantasy.
2. The thread is about the obvious hypocrisy by the GOP in regards to embassy attacks.

Each, question (Silly FOX/GOP talking point) has been answered 100 times and even directly blown up in the faces of the accusers when Hillary slapped them all down like children.

I do not like Hillary, but she put all that silly shit into perspective and all but silenced the GOP, until AFTER the hearings when some acted as if no one had just addressed all their fantasy "scandal" questions.

An obvious example is the asking of the questions above - unfortunately those stupid pics of "it is not going to happen" actually are appropriate in this instance.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Fed Up ()
Date: September 24, 2013 01:37AM

^ THANK YOU! This ridiculous bullshit has to stop. There is something pathological about these people.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Full of shit on both sides ()
Date: September 24, 2013 02:33AM

answered again, we are done Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Three of them resulted in the death of the
> ambassador stationed there at the time.
>

BS. Name them.

The last ambassador killed prior to Stevens was Adolph Dubs in Kabul in 1979 and not on an attack on the embassy.

>
> > >
> > > How many of those attacks were blamed on a
> > YouTube
> > > video that nobody watched?
>
> None, and none have been since - speculation does
> not equal statement. GOP hysteria about a few
> hours and a few words is why you puke out the
> "youtube" crap.


BS. It wasn't a "few hours and a few words." It was an extended and coordinated effort to move the focus for any blame away from the administration at a critical point near the end of the election. It went on for weeks. The only reason that they backed off of it was when the facts just made the story appear ridiculous and more embarrassing than they could manage. Even guys like Bob Schieffer and George Stephanopoulos were basically laughing at it. Worse yet, they played the same bullshit with the families of the victims when they clearly knew otherwise at that point in time.


>
> Very few were even known about at the time. GOP
> hysteria about a few hours and a few words is why
> you puke out the same irrelevant crap.
>

Not true. But they did not happen during an election cycle or on the anniversary of 9/11 though so... Also a lot were relatively minor attacks, not a full-blown assault on the compound. Like the one which happened in Pakistan the other day which didn't receive a lot of attention.

The Obama administration brought most of it on themselves trying to play a political game. Had they come out from the start and dealt with it as they should have there would not have been much of any controversy to begin with.


> Many, yet again, until the past few years, the 13
> attacks and 89 dead people were just the result of
> "doing business as usual". GOP hysteria about a
> few hours and a few words is why you are concerned
> about what was left behind.
>

BS.


>
> We have not answered for a few reasons:
>
> 1. The entire idea of this 1 attack being a
> "scandal" is fantasy.


The attack was not the scandal. The scandal was the obvious attempt to make sure that any potential political effects were pushed off until after the election.


> 2. The thread is about the obvious hypocrisy by
> the GOP in regards to embassy attacks.
>
> Each, question (Silly FOX/GOP talking point) has
> been answered 100 times and even directly blown up
> in the faces of the accusers when Hillary slapped
> them all down like children.


Not really. They basically gave Hillary a pass for the most part after her "head injury" episode and leaving office. Lots of questions out there which have never been answered.

Like, specifically, what was Obama doing on the night of the attack? That's still not been answered, likely because the answer is preparing for his campaign appearance in Vegas the next day (which he didn't miss btw).

Why did Clinton not appear to address questions regarding the incident as would be expected in such a case in her role as Sec. of State?

Why is DOJ still slow-walking pursuit of people who we know were involved? The press has no problem finding them. The answer is that they don't want to pursue them as military targets (ala Gitmo) and they definitely don't want trials in the press especially going into the elections.

Among others.


>
> I do not like Hillary, but she put all that silly
> shit into perspective and all but silenced the
> GOP, until AFTER the hearings when some acted as
> if no one had just addressed all their fantasy
> "scandal" questions.
>
> An obvious example is the asking of the questions
> above - unfortunately those stupid pics of "it is
> not going to happen" actually are appropriate in
> this instance.

No, she didn't really as even many non-aligned journalists noted at the time. Her "what difference does it make" comment will be with her for a long time and not in a good way.

Look, I blame Fox and idiots like Issa for turning this whole deal into a political game more than anyone, but to pretend like it's "not a story" is just buying into the same type of talking point bullshit from the other side. There are plenty of more independent people like Tapper at ABC and Attkisson at CBS among many others who see the bullshit on both sides.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: abelard ()
Date: September 24, 2013 04:14AM

> How many of those attacks did the Bush administration hesitate to call terrorist acts?

I must say that for this particular point, I honestly don't see what they're going for, even theoretically. What's the worst here? If the president doesn't call this a terrorist act for, say, a day, does he give time for the perpetrators to flee? If he waits for 5 seconds, is he a stronger leader more able to deter future attacks? What if he waits 5 hours, or 5 days, or 5 months, what changes? Is there some optimal point where he appears the most presidential? Or is it that the president should fess up about what he knows the moment he knows it?

I think the Benghazi scandal-farmers would do better if they made it clear what they think even might have happened. Just trotting out a tar baby isn't enough - you have to give your target some motive for touching it.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: wrongg ()
Date: September 24, 2013 05:56AM

The President in this case decided to lie about the terrorist attack because he wanted to be re elected.

He believed that any reference to terror would hurt his credibility as he had articulated that the few remaining terrorists were running for cover.

A random act by street hoodlums in response to a video sounded better than a coordinated attack in a country he had just bombed to help oust the leader who had been in check for many years.

All decisions made about what to do during and after the attacks were made with the ultimate concerns being election related.

This included as we now know from the hearings deliberate lies about the nature of the attack. It was identified as a coordinated terror attack immediately.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/24/2013 05:57AM by wrongg.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: liberal logic 27 ()
Date: September 24, 2013 07:44AM


Attachments:
Benghazi_Not_Going_To_Happen.png
aahillary-what-difference-does-it-make.jpg
DeadHorse.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: man up and answer or STFU ()
Date: September 24, 2013 09:44AM

answered again, we are done Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> answer them Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > man up and answer or STFU Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > OP,
> > >
> > > Which one of the aforementioned attacks
> killed
> > the
> > > ambassador?
>
> Three of them resulted in the death of the
> ambassador stationed there at the time.

Name them. Name the Ambassadors and/or the station post of the Ambassadors that were killed as a result of the aforementioned terrorist attacks on the Embassies.

Actually, just name one. If you can't, you are just another liberal liar spouting liberal lies.

> > >
> > > How many of those attacks were blamed on a
> > YouTube
> > > video that nobody watched?
>
> None, and none have been since - speculation does
> not equal statement. GOP hysteria about a few
> hours and a few words is why you puke out the
> "youtube" crap.

No, another liberal lie from a liberal liar. Susan Rice told audiences of FIVE separate television talk shows, just days after the military-style assault, that a YouTube video which blasphemed the Muslim prophet Muhammad, sparked a protest among Libyan civilians that spiraled out of control. We know that was a lie. She made these statements FIVE days after the attack.

NINE days later, President Obama was still blaming the YouTube video on the campaign trail.

Why do you keep lying? It is as if you think that all of this information is not readily available with a couple clicks of the mouse. And, no, I did not get this information from Fox News. Susan Rice's TV appearances are all over the place.

> > >
> > > How many of those attacks did the Bush
> > > administration hesitate to call terrorist
> acts?
>
> Very few were even known about at the time. GOP
> hysteria about a few hours and a few words is why
> you puke out the same irrelevant crap.

You are telling me that embassies were attacked and nobody knew about it? Seems a bit far fetched. So, which one was not called a terrorist attack?

> > >
> > > How many of those attacks left raw data and
> > > intelligence unsecured for days?
>
> Many, yet again, until the past few years, the 13
> attacks and 89 dead people were just the result of
> "doing business as usual". GOP hysteria about a
> few hours and a few words is why you are concerned
> about what was left behind.

Many? Do you ever stop lying? Name one where raw data and intelligence was left behind. Just one. Provide a link.

> > > Waiting....
>
> You wait is over.

Actually, I am still waiting for one morsel of truth. It appears that my wait has resulted in a long list of lies from a liar.

> > These are actually good questions. How come no
> > Obama sycophant hasn't answered them really
> isn't
> > surprising.
>
>
> We have not answered for a few reasons:
>
> 1. The entire idea of this 1 attack being a
> "scandal" is fantasy.
> 2. The thread is about the obvious hypocrisy by
> the GOP in regards to embassy attacks.
>
> Each, question (Silly FOX/GOP talking point) has
> been answered 100 times and even directly blown up
> in the faces of the accusers when Hillary slapped
> them all down like children.
>
> I do not like Hillary, but she put all that silly
> shit into perspective and all but silenced the
> GOP, until AFTER the hearings when some acted as
> if no one had just addressed all their fantasy
> "scandal" questions.
>
> An obvious example is the asking of the questions
> above - unfortunately those stupid pics of "it is
> not going to happen" actually are appropriate in
> this instance.

Your lies do not equal answers.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: liberal logic 27 ()
Date: September 24, 2013 09:53AM


Attachments:
Benghazi_Ain't_No_Scandal.jpg
Hate_Obama.png
Libs!.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: I got pictures too! ()
Date: September 24, 2013 10:44AM

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQix7qvb6D0sAGpzwrqWZflemmings_bumper_bumper_sticker.jpg?color

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: abelard ()
Date: September 24, 2013 11:07AM

>He believed that any reference to terror would hurt his credibility as he had
>articulated that the few remaining terrorists were running for cover.

This turns on several suppositions, none of which seem to be correct.

There is little reason to suspect that an act of terror so close to the election would hurt Obama unduly. If anything, it might draw attention to his credentials as a terrorist-killer. I seem to recall that, at the time, the Fox line on Obama killing Bin Laden was that Obama was taking too much credit for a killing performed by military forces, like he was trying to say he killed the guy himself, in person. It didn't work but it did draw attention to an uncomfortable fact from the perspective of the GOP: Bush never caught Bin Laden and Obama did. Did Obama want to use Benghazi for political gain, it seems more likely that he would immediately call it a terrorist event (whether it was or not) and swear to personally hunt the fuckers to the ends of the earth. Obama hasn't been (to the best of my knowledge) foolish enough to go on record anywhere implying 'mission accomplished' with regards to terror, so no reason to believe that this event would be especially embarrassing.

There is also little reason to believe that this event would have a strong effect on the electorate, necessitating 'desperate measures' by Obama. He was doing okay in the poles and Romney was suffering daily foot-in-mouth incidents. And as we've seen from the attempts to turn Benghazi into a 'scandal', the american public was not exactly waiting on pins and needles to find out what happened there. One way or the other, it probably wasn't gonna sway the election, not compared to economic issues and whatnot, so it's not like there was so much at stake that risky political maneuvers were required.

But let's assume for a moment that you're right, and that Obama hoped to forestall the revelation that this was a terrorist incident even when he knew perfectly well that it was. How long do you think he hoped to contain this 'incendiary information'? A day? A week? How long until somebody spills the beans, given that terrorists do what they do for the very purpose of bean-spilling. If delaying revelation was an Obama tactic, it was a remarkably stupid one that was absolutely sure to fail. I know you don't think much of the man but he isn't a moron.

So there was pretty much no reason for Obama to not call this a terrorist incident, there was little at stake whether he did so or not, and no reason to expect that such a 'tactic' would have 'worked'. And (and this is the kicker) Obama actually said the words 'terrorist incident' the very next morning in the rose garden. I'm really not sure what's left to talk about here.

Possibly one thing: the more the GOP and Fox try to drum up a Benghazi 'scandal', the more it seems like they are the ones trying to turn dead Americans into political hay. Politics is politics but these are actual men who died serving their country. They deserve better than this.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: indeed ()
Date: September 24, 2013 11:12AM

abelard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Politics is politics but these are actual men who died serving
> their country. They deserve better than this.

True. They do deserve better than a Secretary of State and potential Presidential candidate asking "what difference does it make?"

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Truth B Told ()
Date: September 24, 2013 11:29AM

indeed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> True. They do deserve better than a Secretary of
> State and potential Presidential candidate asking
> "what difference does it make?"

But, of course, that is not what she said, is it?

"With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans," Clinton responded, raising her voice at Johnson, who continued to interrupt her. "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator."

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: indeed ()
Date: September 24, 2013 11:51AM

Truth B Told Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> indeed Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > True. They do deserve better than a Secretary
> of
> > State and potential Presidential candidate
> asking
> > "what difference does it make?"
>
> But, of course, that is not what she said, is it?
>
> "With all due respect, the fact is we had four
> dead Americans," Clinton responded, raising her
> voice at Johnson, who continued to interrupt her.
> "Was it because of a protest or was it because of
> guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill
> some Americans? What difference at this point
> does it make?
It is our job to figure out what
> happened and do everything we can to prevent it
> from ever happening again, Senator."

You are correct. I left out the phrase "at this point." As to her not seeing what difference that makes is indicative of her being unqualified for the office she may seek. Her indifference is deplorable.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: abelard ()
Date: September 24, 2013 11:56AM

>But, of course, that is not what she said, is it?

You walked right into that one, Indeed, and I think truth's point is a telling one - context gives meaning, and removing Clinton's words from their context makes them opprobrious and inflammatory. What's actually opprobrious here is the attempt to mislead using an actual quote. I'm not accusing you, Indeed, as this is far from the first time I've heard this quote out of context and I assume you're merely repeating what you heard. But truth matters. No, not trying to make out Secretary Clinton as a paragon of truth, but that's what she did say and it's pretty clear she did not mean that she didn't give a crap.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: indeed ()
Date: September 24, 2013 12:06PM

abelard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >But, of course, that is not what she said, is
> it?
>
> You walked right into that one, Indeed, and
> I think truth's point is a telling one -
> context gives meaning, and removing Clinton's
> words from their context makes them opprobrious
> and inflammatory. What's actually
> opprobrious here is the attempt to mislead using
> an actual quote. I'm not accusing you,
> Indeed, as this is far from the first time
> I've heard this quote out of context and I assume
> you're merely repeating what you heard. But truth
> matters. No, not trying to make out Secretary
> Clinton as a paragon of truth, but that's what she
> did say and it's pretty clear she did not mean
> that she didn't give a crap.


Respectfully disagree. The sentences around the quote do nothing to alleviate the notion that she was indifferent. I watched the hearing live, so I am not (unlike many on this forum) parroting a talking point. Her indifference and fake indignation were insulting to those that gave the most.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Truth B Told ()
Date: September 24, 2013 12:25PM

indeed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Respectfully disagree. The sentences around the
> quote do nothing to alleviate the notion that she
> was indifferent. I watched the hearing live, so I
> am not (unlike many on this forum) parroting a
> talking point. Her indifference and fake
> indignation were insulting to those that gave the
> most.

I, too, watched Sec. Clinton's testimony. I was moved by the sincerity of her emotional response to the tragedy that occured in Benghazi. In that hearing room, 5 months later, what difference did the nature of the attack make? Americans had tragically lost their lives and; "It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again."

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: indeed ()
Date: September 24, 2013 12:30PM

Truth B Told Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> indeed Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Respectfully disagree. The sentences around
> the
> > quote do nothing to alleviate the notion that
> she
> > was indifferent. I watched the hearing live, so
> I
> > am not (unlike many on this forum) parroting a
> > talking point. Her indifference and fake
> > indignation were insulting to those that gave
> the
> > most.
>
> I, too, watched Sec. Clinton's testimony. I was
> moved by the sincerity of her emotional response
> to the tragedy that occured in Benghazi. In that
> hearing room, 5 months later, what difference did
> the nature of the attack make? Americans had
> tragically lost their lives and; "It is our job to
> figure out what happened and do everything we can
> to prevent it from ever happening again."


You seriously don't think it matters how/why they were attacked/killed? Well, you can lead a horse to water....

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Seriously... ()
Date: September 24, 2013 12:32PM

indeed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You seriously don't think it matters how/why they
> were attacked/killed? Well, you can lead a horse
> to water....

How does it matter?

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: indeed ()
Date: September 24, 2013 12:42PM

Seriously... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> indeed Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You seriously don't think it matters how/why
> they
> > were attacked/killed? Well, you can lead a
> horse
> > to water....
>
> How does it matter?


In a multitude of ways. It matters because it demonstrates our intelligence gathering and analysis capabilities. It matters because it demonstrates our preventive security procedures and capabilities. It matters because it represents our understanding of regional unrest. There are many more. You seriously don't see any of this mattering? In a way, I feel bad for you.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: idiot indeed ()
Date: September 24, 2013 01:27PM

indeed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Seriously... Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > indeed Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > You seriously don't think it matters how/why
> > they
> > > were attacked/killed? Well, you can lead a
> > horse
> > > to water....
> >
> > How does it matter?
>
>
> In a multitude of ways. It matters because it
> demonstrates our intelligence gathering and
> analysis capabilities. It matters because it
> demonstrates our preventive security procedures
> and capabilities. It matters because it
> represents our understanding of regional unrest.
> There are many more. You seriously don't see any
> of this mattering? In a way, I feel bad for you.


You do not understand anything do you? I am not sure how ignorant you can be? Seriously, how can you ignore the FACT that YOUR concerns are the SAME as stated by Clinton?


Here you go, try to read it slowly and really let it sink in......


"It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again."

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Truth B Told ()
Date: September 24, 2013 01:27PM

indeed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In a multitude of ways. It matters because it
> demonstrates our intelligence gathering and
> analysis capabilities. It matters because it
> demonstrates our preventive security procedures
> and capabilities. It matters because it
> represents our understanding of regional unrest.
> There are many more. You seriously don't see any
> of this mattering? In a way, I feel bad for you.

Clearly, our intelligence gathering and analysis capabilities failed regardless the nature of the attack.

Clearly, our preventive security procedures and capabilities failed, regardless the nature of the attack.

Clearly, our understanding of regional unrest failed, regardless the nature of the attack.

Seriously, I do not see how the nature of the attack matters. Not at all.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Liberal Logic 28 ()
Date: September 24, 2013 01:45PM

abelard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> There is little reason to suspect that an act of
> terror so close to the election would hurt Obama
> unduly. If anything, it might draw attention to
> his credentials as a terrorist-killer. I seem to
> recall that, at the time, the Fox line on Obama
> killing Bin Laden was that Obama was taking too
> much
credit for a killing performed by
> military forces, like he was trying to say he
> killed the guy himself, in person. It didn't work
> but it did draw attention to an uncomfortable fact
> from the perspective of the GOP: Bush never caught
> Bin Laden and Obama did. Did Obama want to use
> Benghazi for political gain, it seems more likely
> that he would immediately call it a
> terrorist event (whether it was or not) and swear
> to personally hunt the fuckers to the ends of the
> earth. Obama hasn't been (to the best of my
> knowledge) foolish enough to go on record anywhere
> implying 'mission accomplished' with regards to
> terror, so no reason to believe that this event
> would be especially embarrassing.

First Obama didnt catch him like you liberals always push, the CIA and Seal Team 6 did.

Second Bush wasnt running for president so again let those talking points go.

Third Obamas whole thing was there were no terror strikes under his watch, there were several including on American soil. The Obama Administration just found a way to eliminate terrorist attacks by refusing to acknowledge they exist when they happen.

> There is also little reason to believe that this
> event would have a strong effect on the
> electorate, necessitating 'desperate measures' by
> Obama. He was doing okay in the poles and Romney
> was suffering daily foot-in-mouth incidents. And
> as we've seen from the attempts to turn Benghazi
> into a 'scandal', the american public was not
> exactly waiting on pins and needles to find out
> what happened there. One way or the other, it
> probably wasn't gonna sway the election, not
> compared to economic issues and whatnot, so it's
> not like there was so much at stake that risky
> political maneuvers were required.

You clearly dont understand politics very well.

> But let's assume for a moment that you're right,
> and that Obama hoped to forestall the revelation
> that this was a terrorist incident even when he
> knew perfectly well that it was. How long do you
> think he hoped to contain this 'incendiary
> information'? A day? A week? How long until
> somebody spills the beans, given that terrorists
> do what they do for the very purpose of
> bean-spilling. If delaying revelation was an
> Obama tactic, it was a remarkably stupid one that
> was absolutely sure to fail. I know you don't
> think much of the man but he isn't a moron.

The knew the second it happened it was a terrorist attack, even Diane Feinstien admits that. The youtube stunt was designed to buy time and to get morons like you going who will defend him no matter what he does.

You have no problem being lied to about the attack, why it happened, or an American being put in jail because of it all because it was Obama. I dont think Obama is a complete moron but I think you are and I think he thinks he knows just how stupid his base if which is why he just says whatever he wants to get you guys to go out and defend him like youre doing now.

> So there was pretty much no reason for Obama to
> not call this a terrorist incident, there was
> little at stake whether he did so or not, and no
> reason to expect that such a 'tactic' would have
> 'worked'. And (and this is the kicker) Obama
> actually said the words 'terrorist incident' the
> very next morning in the rose garden. I'm really
> not sure what's left to talk about here.

Then why did he blame a youtube video if there was no reason not to be honest?

Why are you fine with being blatently lied too?

Why are you fine with a President turning the United States of America into the laughing stock of the world standing in front of the UN blaming a Youtube video that had to have caused world leaders to piss their pants laughing at what a joke that was?

> Possibly one thing: the more the GOP and Fox try
> to drum up a Benghazi 'scandal', the more it seems
> like they are the ones trying to turn dead
> Americans into political hay. Politics is
> politics but these are actual men who died serving
> their country. They deserve better than this.

Youre right they do deserve better.

They deserved better than being denied help.

They deserved better than having their deaths be turned into a meaningless random act blaming a youtube video.

They deserved better than having their families lied too.

They deserved better than the funerals being turned into a venue to push known lied.

They deserved better than to have all the suvivors hidden away.

They deserved better than to have Hillary say it doesnt matter.

They deserved better than to have had their graves pissed on which is all the progressives have been doing since the attack started since they were unlucky enough to be attacked at the wrong time during the election cycle

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: wrongg ()
Date: September 24, 2013 02:57PM

It is our job to find out what happened and prevent it from happening again.


So at that point, it did matter.

Her statement makes no sense no matter how you slice it. As for Abelard in his dream land where Obama identified it as a terror attack the next day, that did not happen. He said there would be consequences if it turned out to be an act of terror.

Everyone new it was an act of terror almost as soon as it started. Do you know why we know this? The hearings.

You point that an act of terror would not have hurt a sitting President, especially would that could have been prevented or defended is a joke.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: On the other hand ()
Date: September 24, 2013 04:28PM

wrongg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It is our job to find out what happened and
> prevent it from happening again.
>
>
> So at that point, it did matter.
>
> Her statement makes no sense no matter how you
> slice it. As for Abelard in his dream land where
> Obama identified it as a terror attack the next
> day, that did not happen. He said there would be
> consequences if it turned out to be an act of
> terror.
>
> Everyone new it was an act of terror almost as
> soon as it started. Do you know why we know this?
> The hearings.
>
> You point that an act of terror would not have
> hurt a sitting President, especially would that
> could have been prevented or defended is a joke.


abelard is just as partisan as Gerry or ferfux. He will wrap his convoluted defenses in rabbit holes and non-sequiturs but in the end, it's all the republicans fault and never Obama's in his mind. If he'd throw in a few ad hominem attacks and a few anti-semetic rantings, he'd be gerry's twin.

FFU is a place where folks come to vent, not to discuss and not to learn. It serves it's purpose. But you won't find civil or informative discourse here as that happens once every 1000 threads.

I doubt less than a dozen minds have been changed on politics, theology or other heavy issues since the inception of this "blog". Accept that and then join the madness or read and laugh along.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: abelard ()
Date: September 24, 2013 04:45PM

>FFU is a place where folks come to vent, not to discuss and not to learn.

Doesn't have to be that way, hand, and it's a mistake to assume that it is. Also somewhat amusing that you (rightly) cast derision on ad hominem attacks by ... attacking me ad hominem.

True though - I don't come here to be persuaded (although I sometimes am) so much as I do to spar and enjoy the give-and-take of manly argument. And you're right that I'm frequently disappointed - straw-manning one's opponent with things like '[he thinks] it's all the republicans fault and never Obama's' is the argumentative equivalent of dumping the checkers board on the ground and holding your breath to 'win'. You can do better.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Liberal Logic 28 ()
Date: September 24, 2013 05:20PM

abelard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> And you're right that I'm frequently disappointed
> - straw-manning one's opponent with things like
> '[he thinks] it's all the republicans fault and
> never Obama's' is the argumentative equivalent of
> dumping the checkers board on the ground and
> holding your breath to 'win'. You can do better.


Says the one defending the administration blaming a Youtube video for weeks.

Even Diane Feinstein calls them out on that yet youre to the left of her on the issue.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Fat Bottom Girl ()
Date: September 24, 2013 05:50PM

Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Says the one defending the administration blaming
> a Youtube video for weeks.

"What difference at this point does it make?" ~~ HRC


Attachments:
Benghazi.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: abelard ()
Date: September 24, 2013 05:58PM

>Says the one defending the administration blaming a Youtube video for weeks.

Again, assuming I'm 'defending' anyone is bush-league nonsense. It's actually two mistakes: assuming that I've got a 'side' and assuming you can tell which 'side' I'm on.

I'll make the point more plainly. I'm also in the midst of a furious row (elsewhere) on the evolution of mating strategies in birds. This in no way implies that I'm a) pro-bird, b) anti-bird, or c) on the side of robins and against finches. Disagreement does not necessarily imply contempt - people of good character can discuss most anything without having a 'side' to defend, merely a shared interest in hashing things out.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Liberal Logic 28 ()
Date: September 24, 2013 06:05PM

abelard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Again, assuming I'm 'defending' anyone is
> bush-league nonsense. It's actually two mistakes:
> assuming that I've got a 'side' and assuming you
> can tell which 'side' I'm on.

You can claim you dont have a side all you want, youre responses clearly have a side.

> I'll make the point more plainly. I'm also in the
> midst of a furious row (elsewhere) on the
> evolution of mating strategies in birds. This in
> no way implies that I'm a) pro-bird, b) anti-bird,
> or c) on the side of robins and against finches.
> Disagreement does not necessarily imply contempt -
> people of good character can discuss most anything
> without having a 'side' to defend, merely a shared
> interest in hashing things out.

And now were at the part where you completely change topics and avoid the whole blaming a youtube video for weeks thing.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: abelard ()
Date: September 24, 2013 06:17PM

>And now were at the part where you completely change topics and avoid the whole blaming a youtube video for weeks thing.

You honestly can't see the point I was trying to make here? Or are you just making my point for me (that making 'the point' all about your opponent is the method of a dullard)? If it's the latter - bravo.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/24/2013 06:19PM by abelard.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: wrongg ()
Date: September 24, 2013 06:52PM

Actually he was making the point that he is still waiting for you to respond to the fact that the administration went for weeks blaming a video when they knew it was an organized planned attack from the beginning.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: abelard ()
Date: September 24, 2013 07:07PM

Ah. So not 'pretend-dullard', then. This was fun.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/24/2013 07:08PM by abelard.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: pWCpC ()
Date: September 24, 2013 07:17PM

abelard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ah. So not 'pretend-dullard', then. This was
> fun.


You still didn't answer.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Liberal Logic 28 ()
Date: September 24, 2013 07:42PM

abelard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ah. So not 'pretend-dullard', then. This was
> fun.


As mentioned Im still waiting for you to address that fact.

So to sum up you say youre not taking sides but youre defending Obama tooth and nail on things even Diana Feinstein has thrown them under the bus for.

You say you want an intellectual debate yet as soon as youre challenged on the youtube fact you go into a rant about birds and keep avoiding the question over and over.

So basically what we learned in the end is that youre to the left of Feinstein and as usual your empty rhetoric about being impartial and wanting intelligent discussion is nothing more than another off topic rant.

That ad hominem attack on you you were complaining about seems to be 100 percent spot on.

So again if they called it a terrorist attack why was a youtube video blamed for weeks included multiple high level officials on several venues talking about it and the President himself giving a speech to the UN about it?

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: wrongg ()
Date: September 24, 2013 07:59PM

28, pretty sure abe has bowed out.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: abelard ()
Date: September 24, 2013 09:49PM

Wrongg is right. Sorry, could't resist.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: middle school Mike ()
Date: December 07, 2013 07:17AM

This was a very informative thread. Thank you all.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: Gerrymanderer2 ()
Date: December 07, 2013 08:58AM

The do as I say not as I do party. The two wrongs make a right party.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: George W Bush's 13 Benghazis
Posted by: HC 4 ME ()
Date: June 07, 2014 07:30AM

Reality: Conservative's Enemy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sharonista Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Great post, excusing obamas failures by
> pointing
> > out Bushs.
>
> Actually, it's a great post because it points out
> the hypocrisy that conservatives so willingly
> embrace.


EXACTLY!

Options: ReplyQuote


Your Name: 
Your Email (Optional): 
Subject: 
Attach a file
  • No file can be larger than 75 MB
  • All files together cannot be larger than 300 MB
  • 30 more file(s) can be attached to this message
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 **         ********   *******   ********        ** 
 **    **   **    **  **     **     **           ** 
 **    **       **    **            **           ** 
 **    **      **     ********      **           ** 
 *********    **      **     **     **     **    ** 
       **     **      **     **     **     **    ** 
       **     **       *******      **      ******  
This forum powered by Phorum.