all guys.
Here's what I'd like to know... how often do embassies request extra security? Is it one of those situations where everybody requests security, and relatively often, and this attack just happened to coincide with a request? Or are requests rare, and therefore should have set off alarm bells when the request came in?
It must feel good not to hide it any longer. Good for you! God bless
What's evil about your side? The Democrats?
the lack of balls when dealing with en lement spending ...anything else? they don't ignore science..
So they don't stand by their convictions enough for your liking then eh?
So really, you find nothing wrong with anything Democrats do except they aren't vocal enough? Their policies however are all ok in your book?
So you're a partisan hack.........cool.
yeah because politics are simple, there are no nuances and if you keep it simple dumb asses like yourself can participate..
I try and keep it simple for people like you..Don't want to many things going oveer your head.. lol
democrats acknowledge the deficit has to handled with increasing revenues and cutting spending..
republicans believe all you have to do is lower taxes (revenue) and cut spending and the deficit will disappear
democrats actually want fewer abortions and are willing to provide low cost/free birth control to lower them.. republicans believe if you tell kids not to have sex they won't
Democrats realize not all muslims are terrorists and are actively trying to communicate to the world just that.. Republicans thin that we have to thump our chests and kill all bad muslims.. kill enough of them that they will like us..
Last edited by George Gervin's Afro; 10-11-2012 at 03:23 PM.
'based on the infromation we hve now"..lol
It's not surprising you continualy miss that
You are so full of . you take the most extreme positions of the far right whacko republicans and then try to paint all republicans with the same brush.
And the sad part is, you are so ing stupid or brainwashed by thinkprogress you actually seem to believe it.
Right-Wing Media's Libya Consulate Security Mythology Falls Apart
The conservative media talking point that the White House abdicated its responsibility to secure the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, took a hit Wednesday when CNN's Soledad O'Brien pressed Congressman Jason Chaffetz to acknowledge that he joined House Republicans in voting to cut funding for embassy security.
Since the September attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, the right-wing media have attacked the Obama administration for supposedly not having enough security at the compound. That myth is undermined by a State Department explanation that "no reasonable security presence could have successfully fended" off the attack.
Chaffetz, a surrogate for Mitt Romney's presidential campaign who is helping to lead an investigation into the attack, appeared to discuss that investigation on CNN's Starting Point with Soledad O'Brien. During the interview, Chaffetz echoed the right-wing media talking point that security was insufficient in Benghazi. But O'Brien pointed out the fundamental hypocrisy in this argument by noting that Chaffetz, like other Republicans in the House, voted to cut funding for embassy security.
O'Brien asked: "Is it true that you voted to cut the funding for embassy security?" Chaffetz responded: "Absolutely. Look we have to make priorities and choices in this country."
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/10...ty-myth/190508
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
It wasn't ok for the Bush administration to up Iraq at the cost of thousands of dead GIs and it isn't ok for the Obama administration to up security for the consulate, *IF* it turns out that is what happened.
What I have a problem with here is that the people who most want the latter to be the case have every motivation to lie about it, and interpret every possible fact in a way that suits them, for what I find to be rather crass political purposes.
Not that anyone shouldn't be outraged at the loss of life, or CC's concern isn't genuine at some level, I just find fault with with hand-wavy poo flinging over something so serious.
(edit)
I do hope the Republicans get at some better source do entation, as I am sure the administration will do some ass-covering. The truth deserves better, and in that I do think we should do enough digging to get at what happened to a reasonable degree.
They knew within 24 hours, but kept talking about the Youtube video. It's not surprising you won't admit that.
Better?
Go yourself if you weren't screaming mad about this and demanding the administration be held accountable for ing up the post war plans.
Were you?
(edit)
Or do you think the Bush administration did everything right for the first three years after Saddam was toppled?
If you think that, I have a *small* amount of material you should read.
I thought it sucked.
And feel free to search your ass off in the archives trying to prove me wrong.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been giant cluster s that weren't worth the price (in lives and dollars) and, at the end of the day, haven't necessarily changed anything for the better.
LOL, so you just keep proving my point. Everything Democrats do or say is ok in your book and everything that Republicans do or say is wrong. Again, you're a partisan hack that can't see beyond his party lines. It's cool, just admit it, move on, and accept that you are a really good example of what is wrong with American Government. Good job!
Thinking it sucked, and demanding the heads of the incompetent mother ers who put troops in harms way without decent planning and preparation, and deployed them poorly are two different things.
I remember the red team's "stay the course" dissembling while troops were dying because of that leadership that was downright negligent.
It is still not too late to hold them accountable. Would you support trial or investigation into that?
Look, I could be wrong here because like you, I haven't been following the story all that close either, but I think the problem that people like CC have with this whole thing is that the Obama admin came out right away and said, "this was the result of a movie that was made". Instead of waiting for facts to roll in, like you are now asking everyone to do, they jumped to a conclusion immediately because it seems like, and this is my opinion only, that the current admin refuses to acknowledge that Al Queda is still alive and kicking and as a result of their "all knowing arrogance", refuse to say, "hey we ed up, it didn't really have anything to do with the movie".
Those "cluster s" cost thousands of our soldiers lives, and tens of thousands of Iraqi's and Afghans (at least) lives.
Are you going to demand someone be held accountable for ing that up?
Troops were put in harms way, but I do believe there was plenty of planning and prep.....just not maybe the right planning.
Still though, what does that have to do with the attack on the embassy? I feel like there are probably plenty of threads about the wars.
Also, RG, you are posting far more emotionally these days. What gives?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
