Reply With Quote
Do you think it's just cir stantial that the State department clarified the record in writing as the congressional investigation gets underway? Hillary is making damn sure this cover up doesn't stick to her.
The White house was still claiming 10 days after the ambassador was killed that it appeared to be a protest about the movie that spun out of control. Are you claiming that for ten days the White House didn't ask the state department what happened?
Do you think it's just cir stantial that the State department clarified the record in writing as the congressional investigation gets underway? Hillary is making damn sure this cover up doesn't stick to her.
A concurrent CIA memo obtained by The Associated Press cited intelligence suggesting the demonstrations in Benghazi "were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo" and "evolved into a direct assault" on the diplomatic posts by "extremists."
So I guess the CIA is in on the 'lie'...
I"m not the one claiming anything. You are. Shifting the burden of proof is a very common tactic among twoofers, by the by. Be careful when attempting to do so, lest you fall into the same intellectual traps.
To be fair:
You are paying far more attention to this than I am, at the moment, though. Although I am dubious as to your motivations and more extreme interpretations, your vehemence and what you have presented so far does indicate to me that there is a strong possibility of some sort of stinky-ness going on.
I simply require more proof than you do, as I have less hysterical hatred for the current administration.
Not sure how the alleged reasons for the start of the attack change anything, tbh... unless the allegation is that this was an inside job? crofl
Not surprising you wouldn't understand.
There were protests around the world. They probably had no intelligence that the group was planning the attack. i think that is pretty obvious unless you really think the State department just saw a clear and present danger and just said it. CC probably wants to do that very much. I just do not believe that they would do that any more than I think that any other tragedies have been inside jobs. In that RG is right on to compare partisan individuals as such. I'm looking at you, CC, it's ignorant partisans that are a huge part of the problem.
Intelligence gather is difficult business especially when you have unrest over the entire region. Since the up that was the Iraq war, funding to the intelligence community has been frozen or reduced. This combined with the privatization of our worldwide police force with the likes of Academi aka Blackwater and multinational corporatism run amok has led to a brain drain of talent from the national intelligence community.
Combine this with the typical fiefdoms between the state department, the CIA, the military, and our local police apparatus and you have a giant cluster .
If any of you had been paying any attention to the intelligence community at all you would know that they had been talking about this for awhile and the type of position it puts us in multinationally. The response to the WMD up should have been more attention and not less.
And surprise surprise, they didn't know what the happened just as they said their limited resources and structural issues predicted.
This is the rub partisan people. This is a structural issue that goes beyond who has been in the white house. Obama has done jack and if you think Romney is going to do jack you are kidding yourself. He wants to build more destroyers and tanks that the military doesn't even want. Bush created the downward trend and singlehandedly shamed the intelligence community and destroyed any semblance in support or trust.
Well, go ahead and help us all understand. No one is stopping you.
understand what?
Despite all the evidence to the contrary the White House kept trying to sell the narrative that it wasn't al quaida that killed the ambassador in a planned attack, it was just an unruly mob pissed off about some stupid movie and kept doing it LONG after it was obvious to any thinking person that followed world affairs that it was a bull story. They kept selling it LONG after they knew the truth because they knew there was a certain segment of the population that would believe it. And it worked. You and Chump are Exhibits A and B.
can we just bomb the entire middle east and get rid of them all already?
Maybe we could cut a deal with the Russians and the Chinese to use neutron bombs to wipe them all out and then split the booty three ways. Sounds like a win, win, win.
What evidence do you have of who knew what and when, or who they got it from. Were all the intelligence agencies in accord or even sharing information? Are the intelligence agencies in accord even now as to what the details of the attack were?
Further what on Earth benefit would the White House have from saying that it was the people of Libya that did it? If it was the other way around then your political hack ass would be decrying their support of a people that are killing our envoys.
FFS, you have a report of a WH official and a State Dept official having different reports and you have twisted that into one of them --which happens to be your idea of a political enemy-- has been intentionally lying to us all along.
If you had a modi of sense you would realize that there is at some level a disconnect between the WH and the state department or with some other agency.
The WH has the State Department, the CIA, military intelligence, and every other US intelligence gathering agency reporting to them. The State Department has it's own division and doesn't have the authority to demand information from anyone else.
You are so ignorant to the structure it's sad. You are like WC talking about linear equations.
I don't think I've ever commented what I thought started the attack (I wasn't even in the country at the time)... so I'll take your comment for what is worth...nada
IMO, the biggest up was not having enough security in an area which is basically a combat zone.
What started the attack changes nothing with regards to that...
This is what reeally happened in Benghazi
Letting us in on a secret
By Dana Milbank, Wednesday, October 10, 8:44 PM
More:When House Republicans called a hearing in the middle of their long recess, you knew it would be something big, and indeed it was: They accidentally blew the CIA’s cover.
The purpose of Wednesday’s hearing of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee was to examine security lapses that led to the killing in Benghazi last month of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three others. But in doing so, the lawmakers reminded us why “congressional intelligence” is an oxymoron.
Through their outbursts, cryptic language and boneheaded questioning of State Department officials, the committee members left little doubt that one of the two compounds at which the Americans were killed, described by the administration as a “consulate” and a nearby “annex,” was a CIA base. They did this, helpfully, in a televised public hearing.
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) was the first to unmask the spooks. “Point of order! Point of order!” he called out as a State Department security official, seated in front of an aerial photo of the U.S. facilities in Benghazi, described the chaotic night of the attack. “We’re getting into classified issues that deal with sources and methods that would be totally inappropriate in an open forum such as this.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...2a7_story.html
Republicans are desperate for a scandal to sink Obama. They tried and failed with Fast and Furious, and now they are pinning their hopes on the Benghazi attack. They are reaching, especially Romney, who has came up empty twice in his attempts to politicize this tragedy.
Why were the requests for additional security denied or ignored?
Why were the existing security arrangements pared down in the months leading up to September 11; especially in light of the more than 200 security incidents in Libya over the preceding 13 months?
Why did the administration try to pin the attack on an out-of-control mob reacting to an obscure YouTube video?
Why did the administration continue to try and pin the attack on an an out-of-control mob reacting to an obscure YouTube video even after they knew truth within 24 hours of the assassination?
Several careers need to end over the failure in Benghazi that costs the lives of 4 Americans -- A U. S. Ambassador among them; Barack Obama's, Hillary Clinton's, Jay Carney's, Ambassador Rice's, and that Lamb idiot that testified yesterday.
The question, BIGGER THAN DISCLOSING A CIA SAFE HOUSE, THE EXISTENCE OF WHICH THE ASSASSINS ALREADY KNEW, is why did the State Department remove security details from the region and either deny or ignore repeated requests for security in the months preceding the attack.
if only you asked the same questions of the Bush administtration after ZERO wmds were found.. ohh well it's a democrat..and you want answers now! lol
how about bush and the boys ignoring the intel briefs that terrorists were going to fly planes into buildings.. no you're not a hack lol
BUSH!
If only YOU were asking these questions of Obama, right along side me.
4000 + dead under bush you're silent..4 deaths under Obama you're outraged..lolBUSH!
If only YOU were asking these questions of Obama, right along side me.
I will never be along side of you on any issue in this lifetime
WMD are in Syria!
Still translating the do ents!
Saddam was "bad man"
Brother, you should not make decisions when you are angry. Didn't your mother ever tell you to never say never. I'm starting to think you can't control your emotions. You told me the other day to go to . That's not very nice. God bless
Let me clarify, I hope you burn in ..
have a great day!
by the way, how are those little jacksommerset hypocrites doing today?
Why am I 100% certain, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that you would not be worked up about this, if the president were a Republican?
What does that say about how much stock I should put in the validity of your concerns, all other things being equal?
What does that say about you?
Why does that implication not seem to bother you?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
