# Why Benghazi Matters



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 28, 2012)

_AC-130U Gunship was on-scene in Benghazi, Obama Admin refused to let it fire​_



Written By: Bob
AC-130U Gunship was on-scene in Benghazi, Obama Admin refused to let it fire « Bob Owens
Oct 2612


This is treason.

A much more detailed confirmation from a Delta operator:

Having spent a good bit of time nursing a GLD (ground Laser Designator) in several garden spots around the world, something from the report jumped out at me.

One of the former SEALs was actively painting the target.  That means that Specter WAS ON STATION!  Probably an AC130U.  A ground laser designator is not a briefing pointer laser.  You do not paint a target until the weapons system/designator is synched; which means that the AC130 was on station.

Only two places could have called off the attack at that point; the WH situation command (based on POTUS direction) or AFRICOM commander based on information directly from the target area.

The designator will not work without the plane overhead.

[excerpt]

*This may be the reason General Carter Ham was relieved of duty. He disobeyed presidential orders and sent assistance to those Americans in trouble.*


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac (Oct 28, 2012)

Interesting but i think ill wait for more info.


----------



## emptystep (Oct 28, 2012)

If anyone has a non-right wing news source to back up any of these claims I would be interested in seeing it. At the moment all I can find is an all out right wing news blast from about 8 hours ago.


----------



## Pasco08 (Oct 28, 2012)

emptystep said:


> If anyone has a non-right wing news source to back up any of these claims I would be interested in seeing it. At the moment all I can find is an all out right wing news blast from about 8 hours ago.



Agreed not even fox is running this.


----------



## buckeye45_73 (Oct 28, 2012)

Could U.S. military have helped during Libya attack? - CBS News

You find a way to make this happen," Berntsen says. "There isn't a plan for every single engagement. Sometimes you have to be able to make adjustments. They made zero adjustments in this. *They stood and they watched and our people died."*

The Pentagon says it did move a team of special operators from central Europe to *the large Naval Air Station in Sigonella, Italy, but gave no other details. Sigonella is just an hour's flight from Libya.* Other nearby bases include Aviano and Souda Bay. Military sources tell CBS News that resources at the three bases include fighter jets and Specter AC-130 gunships, which the sources say can be extremely effective in flying in and buzzing a crowd to disperse it.


----------



## Pasco08 (Oct 28, 2012)

buckeye45_73 said:


> Could U.S. military have helped during Libya attack? - CBS News
> 
> You find a way to make this happen," Berntsen says. "There isn't a plan for every single engagement. Sometimes you have to be able to make adjustments. They made zero adjustments in this. *They stood and they watched and our people died."*
> 
> The Pentagon says it did move a team of special operators from central Europe to *the large Naval Air Station in Sigonella, Italy, but gave no other details. Sigonella is just an hour's flight from Libya.* Other nearby bases include Aviano and Souda Bay. Military sources tell CBS News that resources at the three bases include fighter jets and Specter AC-130 gunships, which the sources say can be extremely effective in flying in and buzzing a crowd to disperse it.



So another lie basically which the right is trying to spin? This doesn't shock me.....


----------



## Clementine (Oct 28, 2012)

buckeye45_73 said:


> Could U.S. military have helped during Libya attack? - CBS News
> 
> You find a way to make this happen," Berntsen says. "There isn't a plan for every single engagement. Sometimes you have to be able to make adjustments. They made zero adjustments in this. *They stood and they watched and our people died."*
> 
> The Pentagon says it did move a team of special operators from central Europe to *the large Naval Air Station in Sigonella, Italy, but gave no other details. Sigonella is just an hour's flight from Libya.* Other nearby bases include Aviano and Souda Bay. Military sources tell CBS News that resources at the three bases include fighter jets and Specter AC-130 gunships, which the sources say can be extremely effective in flying in and buzzing a crowd to disperse it.



No matter how many sources are linked to, the liberals will not believe that Obama knew anything about anything.   They believe other people are running things without Obama's input or knowledge.   Well, that is if whatever happens is bad.   If it's good, then Obama was totally engaged from the start.


----------



## emptystep (Oct 28, 2012)

buckeye45_73 said:


> Could U.S. military have helped during Libya attack? - CBS News
> 
> You find a way to make this happen," Berntsen says. "There isn't a plan for every single engagement. Sometimes you have to be able to make adjustments. They made zero adjustments in this. *They stood and they watched and our people died."*
> 
> The Pentagon says it did move a team of special operators from central Europe to *the large Naval Air Station in Sigonella, Italy, but gave no other details. Sigonella is just an hour's flight from Libya.* Other nearby bases include Aviano and Souda Bay. Military sources tell CBS News that resources at the three bases include fighter jets and Specter AC-130 gunships, which the sources say can be extremely effective in flying in and buzzing a crowd to disperse it.



That goes nowhere near what the OP is stating. Did you not read the two or are you intentionally trying to mislead?


----------



## Pasco08 (Oct 28, 2012)

Clementine said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> > Could U.S. military have helped during Libya attack? - CBS News
> ...



So we have outrage over 4 dead but its perfectly fine Bush knew 9/11 was coming and thousands died then but that is OK? Right wingers better get there shit together.


----------



## courseofhistory (Oct 28, 2012)

Yeah, good idea to fire huge heavy weapons at the CIA spy headquarters in Benghazi, assuring the death of everyone in the building and the surrounding area, probably hundreds of deaths!  Republican hype and overkill at it's finest!


----------



## emptystep (Oct 28, 2012)

Clementine said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> > Could U.S. military have helped during Libya attack? - CBS News
> ...



So are you saying you have an independent source to back up what the OP is claiming?


----------



## buckeye45_73 (Oct 28, 2012)

emptystep said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> > Could U.S. military have helped during Libya attack? - CBS News
> ...


 

No, I'm not, prove the OP wrong? Good luck

So I proved they had planes an hour away? Easily could have flown in and rescued the ambassador, so why didnt they?


----------



## buckeye45_73 (Oct 28, 2012)

Pasco08 said:


> Clementine said:
> 
> 
> > buckeye45_73 said:
> ...


 

OMG a truther....you are a left wing kook........WOW.....I guess we didnt land on the moon? Do you have your tinfoil hat made?


----------



## courseofhistory (Oct 28, 2012)

Clementine said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> > Could U.S. military have helped during Libya attack? - CBS News
> ...



I don't think Obama knew nothing but I think the assessments made by those under him and ultimately by him were based on readiness, the possibilities of mass deaths if we took action, how targeted and effective retaliation could have been and much more.  Most scenarios suggested by rw'ers who are after-the-fact hyperventilating arm chair quarter backs would have been more than likely totally disastrous and would have killed possibly hundreds of people.  We had a covert spy operation going on there and it is also a consideration that because it really wasn't an embassy, an attack by us killing Libyans and others there would be construed as an act of war.  No one even begins to think about the possibilites and possible outcomes and perceptions of our actions.


----------



## Pasco08 (Oct 28, 2012)

Yes lets go guns blazing into a new country which we helped overthrow the dictator and give the terror groups the kind of power that they need to re-take power. I realize Republicans like there Guns but Cmon.


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac (Oct 28, 2012)

Why don't we wait for further evidence people. It does no good to sit here and act like conspiracy nuts insulting each other.


----------



## emptystep (Oct 28, 2012)

Crazy monkey the voice of reason. Now I have seen everything. Thanks man. Sincerely.


----------



## Politico (Oct 29, 2012)

Obama didn't refuse anything. If you don't have a clue how ground operations work keep quiet.


----------



## buckeye45_73 (Oct 29, 2012)

Politico said:


> Obama didn't refuse anything. If you don't have a clue how ground operations work keep quiet.


 

yeah enlighten us....we have an embassy being attacked an do ZERO....sure...then we blame it on a video.....Jesus you people are stupid


----------



## Lakhota (Oct 29, 2012)

I doubt Ambassador Stevens would have appreciated a bunch of innocent civilians being slaughtered to kill a few terrorists.  I'll wait for the final investigative report.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

_Benghazi: A Reader Assesses the Evidence [Updated]​_ 

by John Hinderaker in Benghazigate 
Benghazi: A Reader Assesses the Evidence [Updated] | Power Line
October 27, 2012


A reader, relying on publicly available information, has reconstructed what we know and can infer about what happened in Benghazi. I havent tried to verify all of his facts nor do I necessarily vouch for his inferences, although in general they seem reasonable. But his analysis is, I think, a valuable contribution to our understanding, and I reproduce it here in slightly edited form:

This last week may have finally broken the protective wall around the POTUS. Between the comments of Hillary Clinton, Gen. Petraeus, Defense Secretary Panetta and the FOX News report, the picture of what really transpired in Benghazi is starting to emerge. The trail is leading straight to the POTUS.

I have no military service, security clearance, or contacts in the middle east. I dont speak Arabic and have no special skills that would allow me to have a special insight into how the travesty in Benghazi happened, and who is responsible for letting our people die.

All I have are my instincts and google. They allowed me to ascertain within a couple of days that there was no protest outside the consulate before it was attacked. For the administration to attempt to sell such a story infuriated me, especially when Ambassador Rice appeared on five Sunday talks shows on September 16th to spin an obvious lie.

The latest bombshell revelations by FOX News about our people being denied assistance while under attack fits in with my theory of what transpired on 9/11 in Benghazi. I developed my theory by using google to find as many disparate sources of information as I could, and I am presenting you more of what I discovered in hopes you can shine a brighter light on the obvious falsehoods of the Administrations storyline about what they knew and when. 

Rather than include links within the story, I footnoted them and include them at the end of this document.

The timeline of the attack is very important in understanding what happened at the consulate, the rescue by Tyrone Woods and other members of the annex staff, the subsequent assault on the annex, and ultimately, the evacuation of the staff to the Benghazi airport.

First we have the attack, which everyone now agrees happened at 9:40 and was not preceded by a protest of any nature. Charlene Lamb said she was at the situation room monitoring the attack in real time, and that the consulate staff sounded the alarm at about 9:40. By monitoring the attack in real time by watching the video feed from the cameras at the consulate, the State Dept situation room staff  would have seen a large number of armed men.

In the State Dept timeline briefing (1) given on October 9th, the briefer describes their version of what happened that night. Here is how they describe the rescue of the Americans at the consulate:


At this point, the special security team, the quick reaction security team from the other compound, arrive on this compound. They came from what we call the annex. With them  there are six of them  with them are about 16 members of the Libyan February 17th Brigade, the same militia that was  whose  some members of which were on our compound to begin with in the barracks.

Here is how FOX News (2) describes the same event:

Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to stand down, according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to stand down.

Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The rescue team from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.

Question 1: 
Tyrone Woods and his group were described by the State Dept as the quick reaction security team. This implies they were in Benghazi to provide precisely the kind of protective force that would be needed if a situation like this arose. WHO TOLD THEM TO STAND DOWN? Did the order come from their superiors at the annex or from Washington DC? Were their superiors CIA officers or State Dept staff?

So we now have everyone but deceased Ambassador Stevens at the annex at about midnight local time. Again, according to FOX News (2), they called for military assistance because the annex had begun to take fire from the terrorists: 

At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Spectre gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights.

The State Department on Oct. 9th (1) describes it this way:

Once at the annex, the annex has its own security  a security force there. There are people at the annex. The guys in the car join the defense at the annex. They take up firing positions on the roof  some of them do  and other firing positions around the annex. The annex is, at this time, also taking fire and does take fire intermittently, on and off, for the next several hours. The fire consists of AK-47s but also RPGs, and its, at times, quite intense.

As the night goes on, a team of reinforcements from Embassy Tripoli arrives by chartered aircraft at Benghazi airport and makes its way to the compound  to the annex, I should say. And I should have mentioned that the quick reaction  the quick reaction security team that was at the compound has also, in addition to my five agents, has also returned to the annex safely. The reinforcements from Tripoli are at the compound  at the annex. They take up their positions. And somewhere around 5:45 in the morning  sorry, somewhere around 4 oclock in the morning  I have my timeline wrong  somewhere around 4 oclock in the morning the annex takes mortar fire. It is precise and some of the mortar fire lands on the roof of the annex. It immediately killed two security personnel that are there, severely wounds one of the agents thats come from the compound.

Question 2: 
Leon Panetta said this (3) about sending military assistance to the annex:


We quickly responded, as General Dempsey said, in terms of our deploying forces to the region. We had fast platoons in the region. We had ships that we had deployed off of Libya, and we were prepared to respond to any contingency and certainly had forces in place to do that. But as a basic principle here  the basic principle is that you dont deploy forces into harms way without knowing whats going on, without having some real time information about whats taking place. And as a result of not having that kind of information the commander who was on the ground in that area, General Ham, General Dempsey, and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.

The fact is, American assistance WAS sent from Tripoli that night, but it was not military assistance. Who were the 8 guys sent from Tripoli working for? It is logical to assume they were CIA agents or on their payroll. Notice, in the State Department briefing of Oct. 9th, they do not describe the Tripoli contingent other than this:


As the night goes on, a team of reinforcements from Embassy Tripoli arrives by chartered aircraft at Benghazi airport and makes its way to the compound.

So what we have here is the first huge contradiction between Panetta and the military and the CIA. SOMEONE sent those guys from Tripoli, but it was not the military. Why was it ok to send 8 lightly armed American guys from Tripoli into harms way to rescue 30+ people in Benghazi, but not ok to send a heavily armed special forces contingent who have trained for just such a scenario?

The State Dept. was asked about the Tripoli 8 on Oct. 9th and here was their response:


SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL NUMBER TWO: The calls were made to Tripoli at the moment that the  at the same time the agent in the [Tactical Operations Center] sounded the alarm and then proceeded to make calls. Im not going to go into any details about the number of security personnel who moved.

Notice the State Dept. refers to them as security personnel. Whose security personnel? Why only 8 sent (notice State Dept wont give number sent)?

The best description of what happened that night with the rescue mission from Tripoli I found on 9/13, but was skeptical because part of the story conflicted with my no protest theory. After re-reading the story (4), and comparing it with the FOX News report and State Dept briefing, I am sure the part of the story having to do with the rescue of the annex personnel is 100% accurate. Here is how that story describes the rescue:


Captain Fathi al-Obeidi, commander of a special operations force for the February 17 Brigade, told Reuters that he took a call about 1:30 a.m. from Tripoli telling him that a helicopter was on its way from the capitals Mitiga airport with a rescue squad of eight U.S. troops  he described them as marines.

After he met them at Benghazi airport with a convoy of 10 vehicles, mostly pickup trucks, one mounted with an anti-aircraft cannon, the U.S. force directed Obeidi and his men to the GPS coordinates of a farmhouse to find the survivors there.

Here, two more things went wrong. First, Obeidi found four times as many Americans at the single-story, fortified house as he had been told expect  37, not just 10. So he did not have enough transport. Then, the villa came under massive attack.

This time, there was little doubt in the minds of Libyans who experienced it that this was a well-organized assault by men who had mastered the complexities of military mortar fire.
 This attack was planned, Obeid said. The accuracy with which the mortars hit us was too good for any ordinary revolutionaries.

While some Libyan officials suggested that former soldiers from Gaddafis army may have been involved in Benghazi, some of the Islamist fighters also have substantial military experience from years spent fighting with the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Though Libyas deputy interior minister described the locating of the safe house as a critical security breach, the attack may not have been planned for long in advance. The assailants would have had some hours to follow the fleeing Americans and set up an ambush after the consulate attack.

It began to rain down on us, Obeidi said just as the rescue force was preparing to leave. About six mortars fell directly on the path to the villa, he said. One American fell wounded by him. A mortar struck the building itself, throwing from the roof another American posted there onto the men below.

I was being bombarded by calls from all over the country by Libyan government officials who wanted me to hurry and get them out, he said. But  I needed more men and more cars.

Two Americans, including one of the eight security personnel sent from Tripoli, were killed and several wounded.

Finally, dozens more vehicles from the Libyan security forces arrived, the attackers melted away and, as the sun came up over the desert, they reached Benghazi airport, from where the surviving Americans and the bodies were flown out.

So we now know Tyrone Woods was part of those on staff in Benghazi and Glen Doherty was part of the rescue group sent from Tripoli.

Question 3: 
According to FOX News, one of those killed (Tyrone Woods) was painting the enemy mortar team with a laser and calling for air support to take it out. He was killed when a mortar shell hit the roof. The question is: Was any air support available in the area? Were either of the two drones on station armed? Was there an AC130 gunship in the area? Why was no airpower deployed to assist those in the consulate? Even if Panetta did not want to send men, airpower could have been used to provide cover for those in the annex.

Another reader, Thomas Wictor, weighs in on this point via email:


The Benghazi coverup is much worse than you think. Clearly there were air assets on the scene above the CIA annex and they were denied permission to fire.

Tyrone Woods was painting a target with a ground laser designator (GLD). Those are only used when the air asset is overhead, ready to fire. The jihadis can use cell phones with night-vision capabilities to see the laser beam, which then pinpoints the location of the person using the GLD. As a former Navy SEAL, Woods wouldve known that. He would only have exposed himself if he thought that the mortar squad was about to be taken out. The air asset didnt fire, and Woods and Glen Doherty were killed by the mortar squad.

There was either a Spectre gunship or an armed Predator or Reaper drone overhead, and it was denied permission to fire. Thats the only explanation that fits. Woods would not have used his GLD for any other reason than to paint a target for an immediate air strike.

Only the commander of AFRICOM and the president have the authority to tell the air asset to not fire in this situation.

Now back to our original correspondent:


Gen Petraeus through the CIA spokesperson said, We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi.  Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. Interesting choice of words, nobody told anybody NOT to help. That is a little different from saying they did tell somebody to help. If an order is NOT given to help, you did not tell somebody not to help, you just ignored their plea.

On to Hillary and her claim that Facebook and Twitter postings (2) during the attack dont constitute evidence that Ansar al-Shariah (and by association Al Qaeda) was involved. When I saw that quote, it immediately brought me back to the most iconic photo of the attack.
 &#8232;&#65532;


When I saw this picture, the thing that instantly struck me was the way the guy was wearing his pants. I started doing some research and came across this (5)  another interview from one of the injured Blue Mountain guards at the consulate:


He himself was hit by grenade shrapnel, and then was shot through the knee when the first wave of attackers came in. He said those he heard speak had local, Benghazi accents, though he added that two men looked foreign.

He said some of the attackers wore masks, and many had their trouser legs rolled up  a mark of Salafi, or purist, Muslims and a common feature in members of Ansar al-Sharia.

Does Mrs. Clinton or the CIA have anybody with expertise on Ansar al-Shariah? Between the Facebook and Twitter posts and this picture, the evidence that Ansar alShariah was involved should have been clear as day. If I can figure it out, those paid to be experts in the Middle East had to know right away who was responsible.

So what do we think is the bottom line? Who were the 8 guys from Tripoli working for and who ordered them to Benghazi? Why was the military not used in terms of special forces or airpower?
 The answers to the above lead directly to the White House and POTUS. The time difference between Benghazi and Washington DC is 6 hours. We also note that at 5 p.m. on September 11 2012, President Obama, Vice President Biden and the Secretary of Defense were meeting in the Oval Office.  The attack was going on for more than an hour, the Ambassadors whereabouts were unknown, and you have to assume Obama, Biden, and Panetta were talking about what to do.

Instead of calling up the military resources at his disposal, the POTUS went small. The protection and rescue operations were outsourced to the Feb 17th militia, who had failed already in their responsibility to protect the consulate, and most of whom fled when the fighting at the consulate started. The ONLY US assets that could be spared were EIGHT brave Americans in Tripoli who most likely were CIA contract employees (including Glen Doherty). 

The final call was by the POTUS. No military action to Libya from Italy or elsewhere could have been undertaken without the POTUS signing off. In the end, his leading from behind strategy and failure to realize the nature of the situation in Benghazi led to the deaths of at least Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty. His meeting at 5 p.m. was 5 hours before they were killed. That is why there is a cover up, the POTUS failed to act. The screw up of not having enough security on the ground in Benghazi can be passed off to Charlene Lamb, Hillary, etc., but in the midst of the crisis, when the lives of the 30+ Americans were on the line, the POTUS froze, and Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed as a result. He cant pass that blame off on anyone, he was informed of the attack and as a result of the decisions he made in the Oval Office with Biden and Panetta, those two brave Americans died. The Panetta smokescreen does not hold water because US personnel WERE sent into harms way, they just werent US military personnel. If there was enough info to send the 8 men from Tripoli, why was that not good enough for our military? This is 100% on Obama.

One related point that may be relevant was this. (6) Sending the military into another country can be a sensitive and delicate decision. CBS News has been told Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did seek clearance from Libya to fly in their airspace, but the administration wont say anything further about what was said or decided on that front.

How do you request clearance from a government which really only exists on paper? The prime minister was not even sworn in yet, and the country was and is ruled by armed militias. When Americans are dying, and someone attacks an embassy or consulate, we do not require permission to do everything in our power to protect out people. In a lawless country like Libya, protocol should take a back seat to saving our Ambassador. 

1. Background Briefing on Libya
2. EXCLUSIVE: CIA operators were denied request for help during Benghazi attack, sources say | Fox News
3. Leon Panetta Opted Against Assisting Officials... | Gather
4.In Libya, deadly fury took U.S. envoys by surprise | Reuters
5. Benghazi consulate attack was targeted assault says security guard - Telegraph 
6. Could U.S. military have helped during Libya attack? - CBS News 
Will all of our correspondents inferences hold up as we learn more about what happened in Benghazi? I dont know. Readers who have additional insights are invited to share them in the comments.

Someday a proper investigation will be done and the truth about Benghazi will emerge. In the meantime, Bill Kristol and the Weekly Standard have posed a series of questions to President Obama:


Friday, in response to questions regarding the events of September 11 in Benghazi, President Obama said this: Nobody wants to find out more what happened than I do. But we want to make sure we get it right, particularly because I have made a commitment to the families impacted as well as to the American people, were going to bring those folks to justice. So, were going to gather all the facts, find out exactly what happened, and make sure that it doesnt happen again but were also going to make sure that we bring to justice those who carried out these attacks.

The interviewer followed up: Were they denied requests for help during the attack?

The president responded: Well, we are finding out exactly what happened. I can tell you, as Ive said over the last couple of months since this happened, the minute I found out what was happening, I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to. Number two, were going to investigate exactly what happened so that it doesnt happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice. And I guarantee you that everyone in the state department, our military, the CIA, you name it, had number one priority making sure that people were safe. These were our folks and were going to find out exactly what happened, but what were also going to do it make sure that we are identifying those who carried out these terrible attacks.

THE WEEKLY STANDARD understands that it will take some time to gather all the facts about what happened on the ground in Benghazi. But presumably the White House already has all the facts about what happened that afternoon and evening in Washingtonor, at least, in the White House. The president was, it appears, in the White House from the time the attack on the consulate in Benghazi began, at around 2:40 pm ET, until the end of combat at the annex, sometime after 9 p.m. ET. So it should be possible to answer these simple questions as to what the president did that afternoon and evening, and when he did it, simply by consulting White House meeting and phone records, and asking the president for his recollections.

1.) To whom did the president give the first of his three very clear directivesthat is, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to?

2.) How did he transmit this directive to the military and other agencies?

3.) During the time when Americans were under attack, did the president convene a formal or informal meeting of his national security council? Did the president go to the situation room?

4.) During this time, with which members of the national security team did the president speak directly?

5.) Did Obama speak by phone or teleconference with the combatant commanders who would have sent assistance to the men under attack?

6.) Did he speak with CIA director David Petraeus?

7.) Was the president made aware of the repeated requests for assistance from the men under attack? When and by whom?

8.) Did he issue any directives in response to these requests?

9.) Did the president refuse to authorize an armed drone strike on the attackers?

10.) Did the president refuse to authorize a C-130 to enter Libyan airspace during the attack? 
UPDATE: Some readers are deeply skeptical of the claim that there must have been a C-130 or similar aircraft in the vicinity of Benghazi. Tom Lipscomb writes:


I have been in touch with the people who have been proposing the on-scene C130u and still have gotten no facts in support of their thesis. Evidently, like your reader, they assumed that the Seals wouldnt have used the laser if there hadnt been aircraft on site who could take advantage of it. they have a point. lighting up that laser gave away the Seals position the same way using tracer ammo does at night.

But NO ONE has confirmed any aircraft and that is a major problem with that hypothesis. No commander is going to send aircraft like a C130u for observation. They have drones to do that and they were apparently already there. If a C130u is on site, it is going to attack. No attack, no planes on site is the way to bet.

It is always possible that something was sent and recalled, but I dont think so. Panettas statement indicates he did nothing for the pathetic reason he gave us. With one hundred percent communication contact, including video, and frequent accurate reports coming in for hours, something no national security official ever had before in such an incident, Panetta claims he didnt know enough.


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac (Oct 29, 2012)

Omg dude. Do you really think anyone is goin to read all that? 

This is a MESSAGE BOARD not a news paper lol


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 29, 2012)

An essay by "Bob" on his website "Bob-Owens.com" that's first sentence begins with "This is treason." Seems like a credible news source.


----------



## idb (Oct 29, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> _Benghazi: A Reader Assesses the Evidence [Updated]​_
> 
> by John Hinderaker in Benghazigate
> Benghazi: A Reader Assesses the Evidence [Updated] | Power Line
> ...



You do realise that this tome reaches no conclusion...don't you?


----------



## Meathead (Oct 29, 2012)

It is obvious that the administration was aware of what happened and failed to act in a timely manner. Any way you spin it, it was a complete breakdown which cost lives. 

As common with scandals, especially in a politically sensitive time such as this, a cover-up would not be unthinkable. Obama is going to have to throw a lot of people under the bus to avoid responsibility. It would be an odious start to a second administration if he is to win. His disapproval ratings would likely set new records in  a matter of months.


----------



## Franticfrank (Oct 29, 2012)

This isn't call of duty. Firing with a 105mm howitzer from an AC130 into a crowd (armed and unarmed) around the consulate would create worse ramifications than Stevens' death.


----------



## Meathead (Oct 29, 2012)

Franticfrank said:


> This isn't call of duty. Firing with a 105mm howitzer from an AC130 into a crowd (armed and unarmed) around the consulate would create worse ramifications than Stevens' death.


I suppose that was what Obama was thinking. He's a bit of a wimp too.


----------



## Claudette (Oct 29, 2012)

However you want to look at it Barrys State Department fucked up big time. Its to bad that those safe arm chair quarterbacks can't land in a consulate under attack. Wonder how much security they would provide to save their sorry asses??

From all I've read the consulate asked for more security several times and were denied. Idiots at the State Department in my book. If Barry knew then he's an idiot as well. 

Barry had his people hit every talk show with that ridiculous video story. All to cover his ass and try to stop negative publicity. After all his re-election is all he's concerned with right now.

They let four men, one an ambasador, die. Three of em were in a 7 hour gun battle while aide, that didnt' come, was an hour away. Talk about a tragedy that could have been avoided. 

My heart goes out to the families of those men and I can only imagine what was going throught their minds as they fought for their lives. 

Barry isnt' worth the sweat of the ass of any of those men.


----------



## Indofred (Oct 29, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> _AC-130U Gunship was on-scene in Benghazi, Obama Admin refused to let it fire​_
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Assuming this is true, you have to find out how was giving the orders.
If Obama knew about it, it's bad news for him.
If it was some right wing spook, Obama is in the clear.

So, who was giving the orders?


----------



## Vel (Oct 29, 2012)

There are great questions that need to be answered.


----------



## Cheddarmelon (Oct 29, 2012)

But to a rightie, mass death is no deterrant to an action.


----------



## emptystep (Oct 29, 2012)

Franticfrank said:


> This isn't call of duty. Firing with a 105mm howitzer from an AC130 into a crowd (armed and unarmed) around the consulate would create worse ramifications than Stevens' death.



I was on my way to post exactly the same thing. Despite what some people seem to think an AC-130 Spectre Gunship is not a sniper rifle. There was people running all over the place and smoke and I don't know what time of the day it was. Also there might have been other birds in the sky. But it is all so simple from the fox point of view.

(That thing has a 105 out the side? Holy s***! Those things are huge.)


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 29, 2012)

When your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail


----------



## asaratis (Oct 29, 2012)

Pasco08 said:


> Clementine said:
> 
> 
> > buckeye45_73 said:
> ...


You talk as if the body count gives Obama a pass on TREASON!

Obama is a gutless coward more interested in his own re-election than defending the USA.

Left wingers have no chance of ever getting their shit together.

Liberalism is a mental disorder wherein idiots think that socialism will work "this time" and they blindly follow an amateur community organizer whose intent is to collapse capitalism and the greatness of the United States, making us just another weak and humble third rate socialist society.


----------



## Claudette (Oct 29, 2012)

The consulate is considered American Soil. 

The consulate was attacked and personally I could care if they wiped out the whole block defending the consulate. American Soil with Americans inside same. 

Anyone who thinks the Libyans would hate us anymore than they already do is delusional.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 29, 2012)

AC-130U ??

We could have killed 200-300 with that baby

Obama is such a pussy and soft on terrorism


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

Politico said:


> Obama didn't refuse anything. If you don't have a clue how ground operations work keep quiet.



*Really?  Of course you're the mavin on Military ground operations, having of course spent years in the service of your country, but never heard of chain of command.  There was a top level decision made here and a General was relieved of duty. People died and obviously Obama has lied.*


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

emptystep said:


> Franticfrank said:
> 
> 
> > This isn't call of duty. Firing with a 105mm howitzer from an AC130 into a crowd (armed and unarmed) around the consulate would create worse ramifications than Stevens' death.
> ...



*Guess you're right. Just imagine, with between 100 to 150 terrorists in the attack so many of them would have been injured or killed. Of course Oblamer could not stand for that.*


----------



## bodecea (Oct 29, 2012)

buckeye45_73 said:


> emptystep said:
> 
> 
> > buckeye45_73 said:
> ...



Landing......where?


----------



## bodecea (Oct 29, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> emptystep said:
> 
> 
> > Franticfrank said:
> ...



Let god sort them out, right?  No...wait...they are all muslim so they're all terrorists, right?


----------



## buckeye45_73 (Oct 29, 2012)

rightwinger said:


> AC-130U ??
> 
> We could have killed 200-300 with that baby
> 
> Obama is such a pussy and soft on terrorism



I agree, but not for that reason


----------



## emptystep (Oct 29, 2012)

bodecea said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> > emptystep said:
> ...


----------



## daveman (Oct 29, 2012)

Grampa Murked U said:


> Omg dude. Do you really think anyone is goin to read all that?
> 
> This is a MESSAGE BOARD not a news paper lol



I read it.  It's plausible.  

Certainly much more plausible than what's coming out of the White House.


----------



## daveman (Oct 29, 2012)

Franticfrank said:


> This isn't call of duty. Firing with a 105mm howitzer from an AC130 into a crowd (armed and unarmed) around the consulate would create worse ramifications than Stevens' death.



Good thing they have a 30-mm Gatling gun on board, huh?


----------



## daveman (Oct 29, 2012)

Indofred said:


> Wehrwolfen said:
> 
> 
> > _AC-130U Gunship was on-scene in Benghazi, Obama Admin refused to let it fire​_
> ...



Only two men had the authority:

The President, and the AFRICOM commander, General Ham.

And Ham was relieved of duty during the attack.  Why?  No one's saying.  But no support was sent.  It's entirely believable Ham was ordering support to aid the State personnel under attack, then was relieved for doing so.  It's impossible to claim he was relieved for withholding support, because no support was deployed after Ham was relieved.


----------



## daveman (Oct 29, 2012)

Vel said:


> There are great questions that need to be answered.



Not according to the Obamabots.


----------



## daveman (Oct 29, 2012)

Cheddarmelon said:


> But to a rightie, mass death is no deterrant to an action.


Go be stupid somewhere else, moron.


----------



## daveman (Oct 29, 2012)

emptystep said:


> Franticfrank said:
> 
> 
> > This isn't call of duty. Firing with a 105mm howitzer from an AC130 into a crowd (armed and unarmed) around the consulate would create worse ramifications than Stevens' death.
> ...



If you don't know what Spectres are armed with, perhaps you should stop talking about them.


----------



## Serioususername (Oct 29, 2012)

daveman said:


> Franticfrank said:
> 
> 
> > This isn't call of duty. Firing with a 105mm howitzer from an AC130 into a crowd (armed and unarmed) around the consulate would create worse ramifications than Stevens' death.
> ...



Which, I'd think by virtue of being a Gatling Gun...is even less accurate then the Howitzer.


----------



## daveman (Oct 29, 2012)

rightwinger said:


> When your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail


Obama's favored tool is appeasement.

How has that worked historically?


----------



## Claudette (Oct 29, 2012)

daveman said:


> Indofred said:
> 
> 
> > Wehrwolfen said:
> ...



I have no doubt thats exactly what happened. Ham was going to send help and was relieved by the assholes in charge. 

Hey. Whats 4 dead Americans as long as the Libyans are happy. 

I mean. Hey. We wouldn't want to kill anyone attacking on US soil, i.e. the consulate. God forbid we actually defend the place with live ammo. Hell we might kill some Libyans in the process. 

Just an unintended consequence that 4 Americans are dead after a seven hour fight for their lives. 

Hope those who orchestrated this rot in hell.


----------



## daveman (Oct 29, 2012)

bodecea said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> > emptystep said:
> ...



icao: Hllb.


----------



## daveman (Oct 29, 2012)

Serioususername said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Franticfrank said:
> ...


Perhaps you should stop trying to think.  You're not very good at it.

Howitzer rounds explode.  30-mm rounds don't.


----------



## lukelk (Oct 29, 2012)

claudette, your a bumbling fool. you need to just shut your mouth, cause you sound retarted


----------



## geauxtohell (Oct 29, 2012)

What exactly would an area kill weapon have done in this scenario other than drop a bunch of artillery danger close on top of the consulate?


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

Serioususername said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Franticfrank said:
> ...



*Don't mean to correct you, however the C-130 is equipt with a 20mm Gatling, 40mm Bofors, and the 105mm Howizter. They are also fitted with Guided Designated Laser (GDL) along with other computerized equipment to pin point their directed fire. (Please prove me wrong.)*


----------



## emptystep (Oct 29, 2012)

And did we know where the friendlies were and who was alive. Line of sight ends at brick walls but a 30-mm round will got through brick walls hardly slowing down. Use your freakin' head for a moment here.


----------



## Conservative (Oct 29, 2012)

daveman said:


> Only two men had the authority:
> 
> The President, and the AFRICOM commander, General Ham.
> 
> And Ham was relieved of duty during the attack.  Why?  No one's saying.  But no support was sent.  It's entirely believable Ham was ordering support to aid the State personnel under attack, then was relieved for doing so.  It's impossible to claim he was relieved for withholding support, because no support was deployed after Ham was relieved.



wait.. he was relieved DURING the actual attack? Not after, but in the middle of?


----------



## Serioususername (Oct 29, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> Serioususername said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



The AC-130U uses a 25mm GAU-12 Equalizer, earlier models used the 20mm. Gatling guns are still less accurate then out-and-out artillery pieces- which the Howitzer is. I'm not saying it's like closing your eyes and throwing rocks at a pond or anything. Just saying when your throwing lead into a civilian populated area...you want the utmost accuracy and a Gatling gun isn't that when compared to the bigger Howitzer...or the Bofors even.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

emptystep said:


> And did we know where the friendlies were and who was alive. Line of sight ends at brick walls but a 30-mm round will got through brick walls hardly slowing down. Use your freakin' head for a moment here.



*Hmm, from what I understand the defenders on the ground were looking to take out the mortar position.  That's what killed the two Seal Team members.*


----------



## catzmeow (Oct 29, 2012)

geauxtohell said:


> What exactly would an area kill weapon have done in this scenario other than drop a bunch of artillery danger close on top of the consulate?



It would have made a big dramatic explosion and the republicans like to blow random things up.


----------



## geauxtohell (Oct 29, 2012)

No, no, no......

What happens is the president clicks his magical remote and the AC-130 unleashes death fairies that descend down to Earth and vaporize all the bad guys.

Obummer was just too chickenshit to click the button because....  Fairies, fast and furious, spiking the football, birth certificate, college transcripts, yaaaaarrrgghhgtrgvrfefsrdhhd...


----------



## catzmeow (Oct 29, 2012)

Clearly, Obama wanted Chris Stevens to die because he was winning the fantasy football league and throwing everything off.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

_A Benghazi inconsistency​_

By:Tom Trinko
October 29, 2012  



The Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta has said that we didn't send in troops to help the American Ambassador because we didn't have enough intelligence on what was going on.

This contradicts President Obama's comments that at the time of the attack he thought the attack was the result of a mob going out of control.  If the Ambassador was under attack by a mob the chances of an ambush or other major risks to US forces would have been very low. A mob does not plan but a terrorist group could have an ambush in place to attack any first responders.

Only if the military, and hence the President, knew during the attack that they were potentially dealing with a coordinated attack by terrorist or paramilitary forces would they have been concerned about the level of intelligence available to them. 

Additionally it seems clear that it was not the military that made the call to abandon Americans to terrorists. 

The US military has often had to go into places with less than complete intelligence.  The risk of casualties is higher but that's what American soldiers train for; the fog of war is never completely lifted. 

If the military had no intelligence about a US consulate being visited by an American Ambassador in a strife torn country with a strong terrorist presence then someone had really dropped the ball.  Perhaps as a result of guidance from the top that with Obama as President US facilities would no longer be targeted by Muslim radicals.

But the troops weren't even sent, according to Panetta, to see if they could reach, and save, the Americans who were under attack.

When American lives were on the line the soldiers who liberated Iraq, stormed Fallujah, and go on dangerous patrols every day in Afghanistan would not say no way just because they didn't have a complete picture of the situation.  They might have advanced slowly but they wouldn't recommend sitting it out while their compatriots were murdered.

But a man who considered trying to kill Osama a "hard" decision might. 

What President would have to think for more than a few seconds about authorizing a strike against a non-military compound where the monster responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent Americans was hiding? 

If Osama had been in a fortified military base with hundreds of guards the President would have had to weigh the probable costs in American soldiers who would die, if Osama had been in a high rise apartment building the President would have had to weigh the potential for innocent civilians being killed; but a raid against a lightly defended compound in a civilian area with widely dispersed houses was unlikely to result in a huge risk to the highly trained team that executed the attack or to innocent civilians.

Obama was probably worried that if Osama wasn't at the compound there would be a political cost.  Or perhaps he was worried about the political impact of a failed raid; even Obama has to have noticed the similarity of his Presidency to Jimmy Carters.

Perhaps Obama thought that if he could blame the Ambassadors death on the Arab street rather than terrorists he could keep the whole thing out of the news; not hard with the main stream media on his side.

But if a bunch of American soldiers were killed the whole situation would change.  Any deaths of American troops would make it impossible to claim that the whole thing was a spontaneous event due to some obscure film on YouTube.


The question then becomes do we want a President who will let American civilians die rather than prudently risk military casualties; and political fallout?

In our troubled world we need a President who can make the hard calls based on what's best for America and not on what's best for his political career.


Read more: 
Blog: A Benghazi inconsistency
[excerpt]


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

Serioususername said:


> Wehrwolfen said:
> 
> 
> > Serioususername said:
> ...



*Thanks for the update. In my day they only used the 7.62 GAU on Puff. Things have certainly changed and so has accuracy improved since I served.*


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

_Questions for White House Over Benghazi Just Beginning​_[/SIZE]

_We have two likely possibilities for what occurred, plus a subplot involving arms to al-Qaeda, which could be treason.​_
[snip]
The moral cowardice of both decisions is unconscionable.

Writing yesterday at the Weekly Standard, William Kristol asked ten questions of the administration, attempting to discover how the White House in general and President Obama in particular responded to the unfolding attacks. It is not a terribly exciting list of questions for the most part, nor was it intended to be. The questions emulate those that might be asked in a criminal indictment:


1.) To whom did the president give the first of his three very clear directives  that is, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to?

2.) How did he transmit this directive to the military and other agencies?

3.) During the time when Americans were under attack, did the president convene a formal or informal meeting of his national security council? Did the president go to the situation room?

4.) During this time, with which members of the national security team did the president speak directly?

5.) Did Obama speak by phone or teleconference with the combatant commanders who would have sent assistance to the men under attack?

6.) Did he speak with CIA director David Petraeus?

These are questions of leadership and basic competence that must be answered. Did Obama actually lead? If he did, who under his command failed?

Then Kristol asks the more provocative questions.


7.) Was the president made aware of the repeated requests for assistance from the men under attack? When and by whom?

8.) Did he issue any directives in response to these requests?

9.) Did the president refuse to authorize an armed drone strike on the attackers?

10.) Did the president refuse to authorize a AC-130 or MC-130 to enter Libyan airspace during the attack?

These ten questions alone could end a presidency, but they are far from the only questions swirling around Benghazi. As noted earlier, we face the question of what Ambassador Stevens was doing in Benghazi without security.

Some are speculating that Stevens was in Benghazi to facilitate the transfer of weapons to rebel forces in Syria fighting the regime of dictator Bashar Assad. This is the position of former CIA operative  Clare Lopez.


Read more: 
PJ Media » Questions for White House Over Benghazi Just Beginning


----------



## g5000 (Oct 29, 2012)

If the President was not watching the attack live, as the nutters are imagining he did without any evidence, then your conspiracy/worse-than-Watergate masturbatory fantasy implodes.


Here's an idea.  Instead of splooging all over your computer monitor over a single story from a network which is clearly biased against Obama which was then layered over with completely fabricated scenarios, how about we wait for some _facts _from the people actually there?

And quit starting a new topic featuring your stoned out fantasy every five minutes.




.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

_Beyond Impeachment: Obama Treasonous over Benghazi​_



by Roger L Simon 
October 29, 2012 




_Is it treason when you put your own reelection above the good of your country and the lives of its citizens? If so, Barack Obama committed treason in leaving the four Americans to die in Benghazi.​_

Our Constitution defines it this way: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Aid and comfort to the enemy  what is that?

When you ascribe an action to the protest of a video when it is actuality a planned terror attack by Ansar al-Shariah, an established offshoot of al-Qaeda (if thats not your enemy, then who)  and you knew that all along, you watched it live without doing anything, and then you told those who wanted to help to stand down? Meanwhile, our government may have been conspiring to arm another offshoot of al-Qaeda in Syria.

How much more treasonous can you get? Benedict Arnold was a piker.

Indeed, the discussion of Benghazi has just begun. And dont be surprised if the conversation escalates from impeachment to treason very quickly. In fact, if Obama wins reelection you can bet on it. The cries of treason will be unstoppable. Not even if the mainstream media will be able to deny them.

As Pat Caddell noted, those same media lapdogs have muzzled themselves in an unprecedented manner in this matter, but our Canadian friends at least have some semblance of honor left, writing:

It is undoubtedly worse than Obama simply turned his back on cornered American citizens in a foreign land, knowing undoubtedly they would die. But that Barack did so without any compelling reasonexcept politicalis beyond evil. Only a moral monster would have made that decision when it was within his powers to possibly save them with almost no effort of his own.

Moral monster? Those are extreme words but they fit an extreme situation and are appropriate to the use of the t-word. But its worse. Many now are trying to figure out the motivation for this behavior  beyond the obvious electoral whoring mentioned above, the need to be seen in a certain manner at a certain moment to be sure the Ohio vote doesnt fall the wrong way.

But is there more than that? Is the treason yet greater? Were Obama and others covering up more than their ineptitude? Just what was Ambassador Stevens doing in Benghazi that day? Why had he left the Libyan capital to meet with the Turkish ambassador on the anniversary of September 11?

Rumors abound. According to Admiral Lyons writing in the Washington Times,

one of Stevens main missions in Libya was to facilitate the transfer of much of Gadhafis military equipment, including the deadly SA-7  portable SAMs  to Islamists and other al Qaeda-affiliated groups fighting the Assad Regime in Syria. In an excellent article, Aaron Klein states that Stevens routinely used our Benghazi consulate (mission) to coordinate the Turkish, Saudi Arabian and Qatari governments support for insurgencies throughout the Middle East. Further, according to Egyptian security sources, Stevens played a central role in recruiting Islamic jihadists to fight the Assad Regime in Syria.

Lyons adds, citing a Clare Lopez article at RadicalIslam.org,


that there were two large warehouse-type buildings associated with our Benghazi mission. During the terrorist attack, the warehouses were probably looted. We do not know what was there and if it was being administrated by our two former Navy SEALs and the CIA operatives who were in Benghazi. Nonetheless, the equipment was going to hardline jihadis.

[excerpt]

Read more:
Roger L. Simon » Beyond Impeachment: Obama Treasonous over Benghazi


----------



## daveman (Oct 29, 2012)

Conservative said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Only two men had the authority:
> ...


That's the story.
I heard a story today from someone inside the military that I trust entirely. The story was in reference to General Ham that Panetta referenced in the quote below. 
quote:
"(The) basic principle is that you don't deploy forces into harm's way without knowing what's going on; without having some real-time information about what's taking place," Panetta told Pentagon reporters. "And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation."
The information I heard today was that General Ham as head of Africom received the same e-mails the White House received requesting help/support as the attack was taking place. General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready. 

General Ham then received the order to stand down. His response was to screw it, he was going to help anyhow. Within 30 seconds to a minute after making the move to respond, his second in command apprehended General Ham and told him that he was now relieved of his command.​


----------



## g5000 (Oct 29, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> _AC-130U Gunship was on-scene in Benghazi, Obama Admin refused to let it fire​_
> 
> 
> 
> ...



All right.  Enough of this fucking bullshit.  This is the stupidest bullshit fabrication in a long while.

There is NO evidence Obama was watching the attack live.

And a designator does work without a plane overhead.  It's just a laser set to a specific frequency with specific pulses and codes imbedded in it.  It does not require any linkup with an aircraft to light up a target.

What kind of fucking retard is coming up with this shit?  Seriously.

Stop spamming the board with these bullshit Benghazi masturbation fantasies, asshole!  All your shit needs to be dumped into the conspiracy section, or the Rubber Room.

.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

g5000 said:


> If the President was not watching the attack live, as the nutters are imagining he did without any evidence, then your conspiracy/worse-than-Watergate masturbatory fantasy implodes.
> 
> 
> Here's an idea.  Instead of splooging all over your computer monitor over a single story from a network which is clearly biased against Obama which was then layered over with completely fabricated scenarios, how about we wait for some _facts _from the people actually there?
> ...



*I notice that you'd prefer to attack me than read the different articles I've posted. Rather than reliy on just the Lame Stream Media, who in all honesty has blacked out this incident in favor to Oblamer. I has searched out various other informative sources. If you prefer to deflect the responsibilty or obfuscate the information you can personally do so, but don't tell me what I should be doing.  We do know that the attack was broadcasted in real time to several locations including the White House Situation Room.

Obama Watched Benghazi Attack From 'Situation Room'

"Lt. Col. Tony Schafer told Fox News that sources were telling him that the President was watching the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya in real-time. Schafer told Fox that "only the President" could have ordered backup for the Americans who were under siege by terrorists so the President was most certainly informed of the situation as it was unfolding. "I hate to say this," Schafer said, "according to my sources, yes, [the President] was one of those in the White House situation room in real-time watching this. And the question becomes, 'What did the President do or not do in the moments he saw this unveiling?' He -- only he -- could issue a directive to Secretary of Defense Panetta to do something." "

To coin an old adage, KMAM.*


----------



## g5000 (Oct 29, 2012)

Stop spamming the board, shitbird.  There are already more than enough threads on this subject, most of them started by you.

.


----------



## LilOlLady (Oct 29, 2012)

What exactly would you call Bush's incompetence when he igorned multiple warning about 911and lied about WMDs in Iraq that got 10,000 americans kill and a millon innocent muslims, 30,00 wounded american troops, Not to mention the monetary cost of his incompetence and corruption aided by Cheney and Rumsfeld. They should have been court martialed when International Tribuanal convicted them of war crimes. And you want to tar and feather Obama and tie him on a rail because 4 americans died? What is is about white is right and black wrong? More than four children die daily because of right wing village idiot's gun right laws.


----------



## BlindBoo (Oct 29, 2012)

It's all about politcal opportunity and the rabid righst efforts to oust the n,,,,,,,,um (lazy person), from the White House.  The louder they yell the more rabid they are.......I think Hammity is going to have a stroke when the President get re-elected.


----------



## TNHarley (Oct 29, 2012)

LilOlLady said:


> What exactly would you call Bush's incompetence when he igorned multiple warning about 911and lied about WMDs in Iraq that got 10,000 americans kill and a millon innocent muslims, 30,00 wounded american troops, Not to mention the monetary cost of his incompetence and corruption aided by Cheney and Rumsfeld. They should have been court martialed when International Tribuanal convicted them of war crimes. And you want to tar and feather Obama and tie him on a rail because 4 americans died? What is is about white is right and black wrong? More than four children die daily because of right wing village idiot's gun right laws.



Ooops. Thought this was about obamas incompetence. Not Bush. WRONG THREAD


----------



## asaratis (Oct 29, 2012)

TNHarley said:


> LilOlLady said:
> 
> 
> > What exactly would you call Bush's incompetence when he igorned multiple warning about 911and lied about WMDs in Iraq that got 10,000 americans kill and a millon innocent muslims, 30,00 wounded american troops, Not to mention the monetary cost of his incompetence and corruption aided by Cheney and Rumsfeld. They should have been court martialed when International Tribuanal convicted them of war crimes. And you want to tar and feather Obama and tie him on a rail because 4 americans died? What is is about white is right and black wrong? More than four children die daily because of right wing village idiot's gun right laws.
> ...



She is incapable of defending Obama on this one.  Therefore, the only out for her and other Obama worshiping idiots....is to come up with some ridiculous shit that she thinks is worse...something Bush is alleged to have done.  For some unknown reason, that in itself is enough to exonerate Obama.

Of course, her logic is totally invalid.  Obama has committed treason and should be thrown from the top of the Washington Monument...and all she can do is talk about Bush.

She is braindead and happy being that way.

She thinks that since only four Americans died...it's okay!

Barack Hussein Obama is a cowardly liar and does not deserve to serve one more day as our Commander in Chief!   What a crock of shit he is!


----------



## Claudette (Oct 29, 2012)

lukelk said:


> claudette, your a bumbling fool. you need to just shut your mouth, cause you sound retarted



Fuck off asshole. 

If it were your brother, father or good friend in that consulate you'd be singing a different tune.


----------



## Clementine (Oct 29, 2012)

Now Obama is trying to say that he gave orders to Marines to protect themselves.   BULLSHIT!!!  This makes no sense considering General Ham was removed from his duties for ignoring orders to stand down.    

The Marine who painted the target, clearly in anticipation of the drone striking the target, was killed and it's likely because he gave his position away when he pointed out the target with the laser.

So, we had people there on the ground and in the air and they were ready to go, but they were ordered to stand down.  

It does no good for people to try and bring up Bush or Clinton ignoring intel for 9/11.   This is about Obama knowing what was happening and not acting.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

g5000 said:


> Wehrwolfen said:
> 
> 
> > _AC-130U Gunship was on-scene in Benghazi, Obama Admin refused to let it fire​_
> ...



*Apparently you are a Obama supporter and prefer to deflect the issue to a personal one by attacking me. Go right ahead. It will not deter me from posting what you and your ilk prefer not to see about your 'Dear One'.  I guess people like Lt. Col Tony Schafer would be considered by you a "fucking retard". The only fantasy rooms around here is the one you live in.  As I said to you previously 'KMAM'.*


----------



## daveman (Oct 29, 2012)




----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 29, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> It's all about politcal opportunity and the rabid righst efforts to oust the n,,,,,,,,um (lazy person), from the White House.  The louder they yell the more rabid they are.......I think Hammity is going to have a stroke when the President get re-elected.



Hey Boo, as a mindless hack with utterly no integrity, have you gone back to blaming the YouTube video, the way Shallow and other forum regressives have?

Obama lied, people died.


----------



## Mustang (Oct 29, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> _AC-130U Gunship was on-scene in Benghazi, Obama Admin refused to let it fire​_
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Another International newsworthy scoop by Bob, huh?  Uh, that's NOT Bob Woodward, by any chance, writing under a pseudonym?


----------



## 4Horsemen (Oct 29, 2012)

For reference to the topic:

*Treason*
Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aiding or involved by such an endeavour.
Treason - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


YES! BY THIS DEFINITION^^ OBAMA IS GUILTY OF TREASON!

Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, Libya, Syria and now Iran


----------



## Claudette (Oct 29, 2012)

Does anyone really think the truth will come out. 

Hell. Barry pulled EP on FF and I wouldn't be a big surprised if he does the same here.


----------



## nitroz (Oct 29, 2012)

emptystep said:


> *If anyone has a non-right wing news source to back up any of these claims* I would be interested in seeing it. At the moment all I can find is an all out right wing news blast from about 8 hours ago.



This


----------



## Mustang (Oct 29, 2012)

Claudette said:


> Does anyone really think the truth will come out.
> 
> Hell. Barry pulled EP on FF and I wouldn't be a big surprised if he does the same here.



The truth NEVER comes out on conservative talk radio.  That much I do know.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

LilOlLady said:


> What exactly would you call Bush's incompetence when he igorned multiple warning about 911and lied about WMDs in Iraq that got 10,000 americans kill and a millon innocent muslims, 30,00 wounded american troops, Not to mention the monetary cost of his incompetence and corruption aided by Cheney and Rumsfeld. They should have been court martialed when International Tribuanal convicted them of war crimes. And you want to tar and feather Obama and tie him on a rail because 4 americans died? What is is about white is right and black wrong? More than four children die daily because of right wing village idiot's gun right laws.



*Frankly I no longer consider what Bush did or didn't do. He is in the past, like all other past presidents. I deal with the present president and find him woefully lacking, self centered, and incompetent. Wow, you do bring up pertinent questions of comparison don't you. I'll take the last first. Chicago that has the strictest gun laws in the U.S. have more murders per day and the guns used there are all illegal. In fact there are more KIA in Chicago per day than in the Stan. Ha, talking about four kids dying due to 'gun rights laws'.
Oh, your giving Bubba Clinton a pass on 9/11. After all the attacks on sovereign ground not to mention WTC#1, the USS Cole, or Khobar Towers. Clinton allowed al Qaeda terrorists to train flying Boeing 757's for at least three years in the U.S.  A good comparison would be to train a Pit Bull to kill and give it to a stranger without telling them the dog has been trained to kill Just what did Clinton know and when did he know it?
You're a poor miss led fool. 
In closing your attempt at deflecting the issue of Ben Ghazi Gate and Obama is futile and pitiful. *


----------



## asaratis (Oct 29, 2012)

Clementine said:


> Now Obama is trying to say that he gave orders to Marines to protect themselves.   BULLSHIT!!!  This makes no sense considering General Ham was removed from his duties for ignoring orders to stand down.
> 
> The Marine who painted the target, clearly in anticipation of the drone striking the target, was killed and it's likely because he gave his position away when he pointed out the target with the laser.
> 
> ...



I think we need to learn more about about "lighting up" with laser.  I think it means that not only is the target is identified with laser light but the weapon intended to fire at it is locked on and ready for the "kill" button to be pushed.

I'll wait on official reports to learn how those on the ground died, but I think from what I have already heard that they went to the embassy, killed a bunch of attackers, found one or more of the Americans, moved to what they considered a safer place and were killed there.

One report is that the two Americans killed 50 to 60 ragheads before being taken out....but I'll wait for confirmation on that before cheering more.


----------



## Pasco08 (Oct 29, 2012)

This isn't a video game where an AC-130 can pinpoint and shoot and not kill any civi's People are honestly really shortsighted.


----------



## BluePhantom (Oct 29, 2012)

emptystep said:


> Clementine said:
> 
> 
> > buckeye45_73 said:
> ...



You are missing the point.  The point is one of logic.  If someone was painting the target it means there *was *something there with the ability to fire. You don't paint the target until you are ready to fire because the laser is easily detected by the enemy and you will give up your position.  In fact because the laser is tied into the firing system of the firing aircraft I don't even think you *can *paint the target without the aircraft being there (although i could be wrong on that). 

Now you could argue that the reports that he was painting the target were false, but if those reports are true then there *had *to be something there with the ability to deliver ordinance.


----------



## emptystep (Oct 29, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> emptystep said:
> 
> 
> > And did we know where the friendlies were and who was alive. Line of sight ends at brick walls but a 30-mm round will got through brick walls hardly slowing down. Use your freakin' head for a moment here.
> ...



*WHAT?!?!? Would you please shout in my deaf ear?!*


----------



## BluePhantom (Oct 29, 2012)

Pasco08 said:


> This isn't a video game where an AC-130 can pinpoint and shoot and not kill any civi's People are honestly really shortsighted.



Funny argument.  My brother actually develops guidance systems for such things.  According to him, put the most accurate kicker in the nfl on the 30 yard line and him on other side of the nation with his rockets and he will put more through the goalposts than the kicker. 

Now you always run the risk of someone getting killed by friendly fire, but you underestimate how precise our targeting systems are.


----------



## Pasco08 (Oct 29, 2012)

BluePhantom said:


> Pasco08 said:
> 
> 
> > This isn't a video game where an AC-130 can pinpoint and shoot and not kill any civi's People are honestly really shortsighted.
> ...



You can honestly and confidently tell me that the gunship is that precise? Don't the AC-130's shoot some rather large rounds?


----------



## NYcarbineer (Oct 29, 2012)

This wehrwolfen nut with his 30 crackpot Benghazi threads a day is really putting a shine on the idiocy of you rightwingers.  

He is your newest best representative.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

Mustang said:


> Wehrwolfen said:
> 
> 
> > _AC-130U Gunship was on-scene in Benghazi, Obama Admin refused to let it fire​_
> ...



*Apparently you are either dyslexic or lacking in reading comprehension. If you look closely the man's name is Bob (Robert) Owens @ www.Bob-Owens.com . *


----------



## g5000 (Oct 29, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > Wehrwolfen said:
> ...



It is interesting that you assume someone who wants to wait until the FACTS are known, and who doesn't guzzle third person guesses about what happened, must be an Obama supporter.

Very interesting.   Sane people who do not guzzle nutter piss must be Obama supporters.

BWA-HA-HA-HA!


What if it turns out the security officer was NOT designating a target, dipshit?  What if Fox News got their reportage wrong, moron?

That shit happens all the time, you know.

Every fucking thing hinges on "facts" which have not been confirmed.

"Oh!  He was designating the target?  Then Obama had to be watching and there had to be an AC-130 on the scene!  Somebody I know who knows someone else told me that was what happened."

Some other dipshit said there had to be armed Predators on the scene.

This is all GUESSES, based on what could very well be a piece of real shitty reporting.

Let's wait until we hear what the security officer himself has to say.  Let's wait until we hear someone who was actually in the Situation Room says whether or not Obama was there and stopped whatever the fuck you think he stopped.

Okay, dipshit?

You are setting a bar here, dumbass.  Think about it.


.

.


----------



## Serioususername (Oct 29, 2012)

BluePhantom said:


> Pasco08 said:
> 
> 
> > This isn't a video game where an AC-130 can pinpoint and shoot and not kill any civi's People are honestly really shortsighted.
> ...



Rocket's aren't guided, Nor is anything an AC-130 fires. All dumb as a board, sure they're accurate but er, they're not laser guided accurate being the rounds are again- not guided within the least. And finally think I found a video of the blasted 25mm firing, been looking for hours at this point.


----------



## Mustang (Oct 29, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> > Wehrwolfen said:
> ...



I saw it.  Apparently, you didn't get the joke.


----------



## BlindBoo (Oct 29, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> BlindBoo said:
> 
> 
> > It's all about politcal opportunity and the rabid righst efforts to oust the n,,,,,,,,um (lazy person), from the White House.  The louder they yell the more rabid they are.......I think Hammity is going to have a stroke when the President get re-elected.
> ...



Sweet-talking will get you nowhere you rabid-puppy.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Oct 29, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> It's all about politcal opportunity and the rabid righst efforts to oust the n,,,,,,,,um (lazy person), from the White House.  The louder they yell the more rabid they are......



No objective person can deny that something is off about this whole affair.  I do believe we aren't being told the whole truth in an effort to help the president save some face.  I don't necessarily believe at this point that he, himself, may have done anything wrong, but somebody along the way certainly did, but he's the president so he'll take the heat for it.

It's no coincidence, in my opinion, that the president has taken a sharp drop in public opinion polls over the past week as more information about this slowly leaks out.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Oct 29, 2012)

Meh.... what's four Americans hung out to dry and left to die at the hands of terrorists?  Load up AF1, let's go to Vegas!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 29, 2012)

Does The Bay of Tonkin incident in 1964 -ring a bell?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 29, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> Sweet-talking will get you nowhere you rabid-puppy.



So, HAVE you gone back to blaming the YouTube video, like Sallow and RDean?


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

Serioususername said:


> BluePhantom said:
> 
> 
> > Pasco08 said:
> ...





For what it's worth, here is a diagram on the AC-130:







I hesitate to bring it up because it's such an idiotic argument that we'd strafe the crowd outside of our consulate with a gunship in the middle of the night. Needless to say, employing the AC-130 would have done much more damage than what was done, resulting in more deaths, much more angst directed at the US, and a much more perilous situation for the entire region.  

The right wing loons are in full smear mode for President Obama.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Needless to say, employing the AC-130 would have done much more damage than what was done, resulting in more deaths, much more angst directed at the US, and a much more perilous situation for the entire region.



I fully believe Obama feels the exact same way.

So he left the Americans to die.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

Pasco08 said:


> BluePhantom said:
> 
> 
> > Pasco08 said:
> ...










This resulted from a google search.

The idea that you can use an ariel platform for crowd control is hilarious.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

OODA_Loop said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Needless to say, employing the AC-130 would have done much more damage than what was done, resulting in more deaths, much more angst directed at the US, and a much more perilous situation for the entire region.
> ...



I guess he could have nuked Bengazzi too; that would have showed them.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 29, 2012)

PoliticalChic said:


> Does The Bay of Tonkin incident in 1964 -ring a bell?



Johnson used that as an excuse to escalate the Vietnam war. I don't think this is similar because Obama is seeking a policy of appeasement with Al Qaeda. Everything the administration has done so far, from the Apology Tour to the refusal to dispatch gunship support, has revolved around appeasing Islamic extremists. Obama has made it clear that the USA was in Libya under the dominion, and supposed protection, of the Islamists. 

The Bush doctrine was to project strength, to show the Muslim world that the United States would answer any act by Muslim forces with deadly force, if necessary.

The Obama doctrine is one of apologetic deferment, demonstrating to the Islamist forces that America will take a back seat and acquiesce to Islamist desires for the region.

Because of this, I don't see Benghazi as a "Bay of Tonkin" situation, but simply the Al Qaeda forces biting the hand that's been feeding them.


----------



## 4Horsemen (Oct 29, 2012)

PoliticalChic said:


> Does The Bay of Tonkin incident in 1964 -ring a bell?



Tolkein


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

PoliticalChic said:


> Does The Bay of Tonkin incident in 1964 -ring a bell?



*Are you inferring that like Democratic Party president Lyndon Johnson before him, Barack Oblamer is lying to the American people?*


----------



## jillian (Oct 29, 2012)

LilOlLady said:


> What exactly would you call Bush's incompetence when he igorned multiple warning about 911and lied about WMDs in Iraq that got 10,000 americans kill and a millon innocent muslims, 30,00 wounded american troops, Not to mention the monetary cost of his incompetence and corruption aided by Cheney and Rumsfeld. They should have been court martialed when International Tribuanal convicted them of war crimes. And you want to tar and feather Obama and tie him on a rail because 4 americans died? What is is about white is right and black wrong? More than four children die daily because of right wing village idiot's gun right laws.



that doesn't count to the lunatic hacks.

this particular o/p is racist scum.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Oct 29, 2012)

4Horsemen said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Does The Bay of Tonkin incident in 1964 -ring a bell?
> ...



Actually, it's Gulf of Tonkin.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



The AC-130 would have stopped the already then laser designated mortar position(s)
 just fine.


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 29, 2012)

buckeye45_73 said:


> emptystep said:
> 
> 
> > buckeye45_73 said:
> ...



Some people watch too many fantasy action films.


----------



## Qantrill (Oct 29, 2012)

emptystep said:


> If anyone has a non-right wing news source to back up any of these claims I would be interested in seeing it. At the moment all I can find is an all out right wing news blast from about 8 hours ago.



Well that would eliminate the U.S. Military of which that joke in the White House is the purported C-I-C.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Oct 29, 2012)

PoliticalChic said:


> Does The Bay of Tonkin incident in 1964 -ring a bell?



Yeah, Gulf Buchanan and I were talking about it the other day.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Oct 29, 2012)

4Horsemen said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Does The Bay of Tonkin incident in 1964 -ring a bell?
> ...



You mean his story where PoliticalChic puts on the magic ring and disappears...

...oh wait, that was my fantasy, not his.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

Pheonixops said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> > emptystep said:
> ...



Too bad we couldn't just send Chuck Norris in.  He took down thousands of terrorists all by himself.


----------



## BluePhantom (Oct 29, 2012)

Serioususername said:


> BluePhantom said:
> 
> 
> > Pasco08 said:
> ...



I never said they were.  The laser guiding and my brother's comments on how accurate our targeting system are are two completely different things.


----------



## freedombecki (Oct 29, 2012)

emptystep said:


> If anyone has a non-right wing news source to back up any of these claims I would be interested in seeing it. At the moment all I can find is an all out right wing news blast from about 8 hours ago.


The Democrat fourth estate has lockstepped any critical evidence away from the American public on this issue.

They're not stupid.


----------



## BluePhantom (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> I hesitate to bring it up because it's such an idiotic argument that we'd strafe the crowd outside of our consulate with a gunship in the middle of the night. Needless to say, employing the AC-130 would have done much more damage than what was done, resulting in more deaths, much more angst directed at the US, and a much more perilous situation for the entire region.



Uh-huh...because in the liberal mind the lives of terrorists are more important than the lives of Americans.


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 29, 2012)

Franticfrank said:


> This isn't call of duty. Firing with a 105mm howitzer from an AC130 into a crowd (armed and unarmed) around the consulate would create worse ramifications than Stevens' death.


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 29, 2012)

daveman said:


> Indofred said:
> 
> 
> > Wehrwolfen said:
> ...



Maybe Ham is trying to cover his own faults, maybe he was relieved of duty (if he was) because he failed to act. I DO think that an investigation of the incident should definitely be in order.


----------



## Pasco08 (Oct 29, 2012)

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Meh.... what's four Americans hung out to dry and left to die at the hands of terrorists?  Load up AF1, let's go to Vegas!



Where is all this horror when bush let 9/11 happen or took us into Iraq under a lie and our boys started to get killed?


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 29, 2012)

daveman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > When your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail
> ...



How is getting this OBL and other top tier, middle, and lower tier AQ operatives, using drones in a liberal manner, and actively fighting the famed 'war on terror' by this Administration called "apeasement"? 

The guy has a neo-con foreign policy you all should love him!


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > buckeye45_73 said:
> ...


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Too bad we couldn't just send Chuck Norris in.  He took down thousands of terrorists all by himself.



Sounds like Tyrone Woods was doing just fine. He just needed the fucking mortars suppressed, but Obama was too busy going to Vegas for a campaign rally to be bothered with such things.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

BluePhantom said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > I hesitate to bring it up because it's such an idiotic argument that we'd strafe the crowd outside of our consulate with a gunship in the middle of the night. Needless to say, employing the AC-130 would have done much more damage than what was done, resulting in more deaths, much more angst directed at the US, and a much more perilous situation for the entire region.
> ...



It is very possible that the AC 130 Gunship would have taken several lives of persons of many nationalities not to mention all hell breaking loose in every capitol of the Islamic world.  And I suppose you'd be fine with a country with embassies and consulates here here sending in close air combat support anytime there is a protest outside of their consulate/facilities here?

Let me guess, you think we play by different rules than they do, right?


----------



## bodecea (Oct 29, 2012)

Lakhota said:


> I doubt Ambassador Stevens would have appreciated a bunch of innocent civilians being slaughtered to kill a few terrorists.  I'll wait for the final investigative report.



To many, there were NO innocent civilians.


----------



## Pasco08 (Oct 29, 2012)

bodecea said:


> Lakhota said:
> 
> 
> > I doubt Ambassador Stevens would have appreciated a bunch of innocent civilians being slaughtered to kill a few terrorists.  I'll wait for the final investigative report.
> ...



And how can you make that call were you on the ground? Were you a witness? OK then please shut the hell up.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

Pheonixops said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



*It's obvious that the Ambassador and the three men assassinated on September 11, 2012 mean very little to you and especially the fact that they were abandoned and refused aid three times by your dear leader. Then there's the fact that General Carter Ham was relieved of duty immediately after refusing to abandon the people in Ben Ghazi*


----------



## Politico (Oct 29, 2012)

Serioususername said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Franticfrank said:
> ...



The only thing the GAU has in common with a Gatling gun is that it spins.


----------



## Liberal (Oct 29, 2012)

I think the real question, if this is true is more over what a GUNSHIP would do..

Vaporize the entire embassy, with our people in it?


----------



## Politico (Oct 29, 2012)

Seeing as it's sole purpose is close combat support no it wouldn't.


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 29, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



No, it's obvious that you like to misrepresent the words and thoughts of the people who disagree with your assertions. Looking at your usage of the "dear leader" meme shows that you are a political hack who only cares about making political points against President Obama. You don't give 1 fuck about Our fellow Americans who were killed. If you had any sense of decency, you would be ashamed of yourself you fucking moron.


----------



## Serioususername (Oct 29, 2012)

Politico said:


> Serioususername said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Kind of getting into semantics here, but if it pleases you. I'll call it a Rotary Cannon from now on...so long as I remember. Either way, It's a Gatling Gun, since the only thing you need to be called as such is...rotating barrels, firing in sequence and all that shit. Kind of like how all Light Machine Guns are Machine Guns, but not all Machine Guns are Light Machine Guns. Well; All Rotary Cannons are Gatling Guns- but not all Gatling Guns are rotary cannons.


----------



## IHBF (Oct 29, 2012)

What was the proximity of these innocent civilians to the mortars locations?


----------



## candycorn (Oct 29, 2012)

Liberal said:


> I think the real question, if this is true is more over what a GUNSHIP would do..
> 
> Vaporize the entire embassy, with our people in it?



It's crazy to bring this up because, again, using this aircraft to disperse a crowd is a bit like dropping the A-bomb.  

In the first place, the plane doesn't do dives and precision bombing; it circles the "target" making a counter-clockwise circle so the crew can focus it's fire on the target to the left of the aircraft.  The circle it makes is large since the plane's stall speed is 100 knots--it always has to be going 100 knots or higher.  Imagine trying to do donuts in the K-mart parking lot at 100mph; pretty big circle.  

Anyway, the target is terrorists so it's not as if there is a big target to hit and since terrorists usually don't wear signs saying "terrorists" our crew at night would be firing at anything standing up.  

The armaments include a 105mm cannon which would ruin the day of anything it touches but more than likely the weapon of choice would be the 20 and 40 mm guns.





Sort of like using a shotgun to get rid of a fly.  

It's an asinine topic.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 29, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Liberal said:
> 
> 
> > I think the real question, if this is true is more over what a GUNSHIP would do..
> ...



*It's not like there were 5 or 10 terrorists. From what I understand there were 100 to 150 attacking and there wasn't anyone else around because bullets were flying. So if it's considered asinine in your opinion, obviously you've never been in a firefight. BTW terrorist have a bad habit of bunching up, that's why it was estimated that the ex-Seals cut down 50 to 60 of them. Now if Spooky had been around they would taken out the mortar that did so much damage and more.*


----------



## Cheddarmelon (Oct 29, 2012)

It's not a precision firing plane in ground support.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGH-zBHbPKc&feature=related]AC-130H Spectre Gunship engages probable SA-3 missiles - YouTube[/ame]

I counted 13 to 14 off target impacts on the ground before they hit the target.


And here's the smaller guns.  the 25 mm.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-FQY7rS9E8]AC-130 Shooting the 25mm Over Najaf, Iraq - YouTube[/ame]

Great for carpeting an area with shells... not so good if you don't know where the friendlies are.  The spread pattern is larger than the buildings.


----------



## Cheddarmelon (Oct 29, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Liberal said:
> ...



FACT CHECK: Did the Navy Seals who died in the Benghazi attacks kill 60 jihadis? - WeCheck: The People's Fact Check that anyone can edit

to date, there are *no Verifiable sources *that state that the ex-seals took out 50-60 attackers.

I find it unlikely.  COULD be true.. but nothing that is fact checked and valid.  (It's mostly on blogs and chat threads, not surprisingly.


----------



## francoHFW (Oct 29, 2012)

Op- Blah blah blah- Fox, Rush etc etc etc have proven themselves to be totally FOS, like Issa and his FOS committee...LOL! Pub dupes.


----------



## francoHFW (Oct 29, 2012)

I've seen film of the semi-consulate with no bullet holes. I think it was RPGs and a fire. Later mortars at the safe house. But carry on with the Pub dupe insanity...


----------



## Claudette (Oct 30, 2012)

Mustang said:


> Claudette said:
> 
> 
> > Does anyone really think the truth will come out.
> ...



I don't listen to talk radio so I don't know either. 

If Barry covered Holders ass on FF its a good bet he'll cover his own on Libya. 

I'm surprised it he hasn't done by now.

Of course that would look pretty bad when your running for that second term. You know. Using EP so no one can get at the truth. Not very sound. Never mind.


----------



## daveman (Oct 30, 2012)

NYcarbineer said:


> This wehrwolfen nut with his 30 crackpot Benghazi threads a day is really putting a shine on the idiocy of you rightwingers.
> 
> He is your newest best representative.


Good Gaea, you absolutely _hate_ it that Obama's failure is getting such attention, don't you?

Sucks to be you, doesn't it?


----------



## daveman (Oct 30, 2012)

Pheonixops said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


He just let 4 Americans be sacrificed to avoid riling up the Muslim Brotherhood.  And if a couple of guys hadn't disobeyed orders, 30 Americans would be dead.

Tell me that's not appeasement.  Lie to me.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Liberal said:
> ...



If there are people in Miami or Atlanta or NYC protesting outside of a foreign country's consulate, would you be okay with them sending combat aircraft into our airspace?


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Cheddarmelon said:


> It's not a precision firing plane in ground support.
> 
> 
> AC-130H Spectre Gunship engages probable SA-3 missiles - YouTube
> ...



With each passing day, we see Conservistan taking shape, do we not?
I'd bet you could get them to say we should be flying these missions over our southern border.


----------



## Si modo (Oct 30, 2012)

Obama's incompetence continues to kill Americans.  He is a dangerous buffoon.  Without having to worry about reelection, can anyone even imagine the disaster he would be in a second term?


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Oct 30, 2012)

I never thought I would see the day when so called Americans felt the absolute need to LIE, PROPAGANDIZE, and cover up the truth when it comes to dead Americans. It's the sickest thing I've witnessed yet. It's further proof that liberalism is sheer evil and has no place in a society where the rules of law APPLY TO EVERYONE..It's bad enough that we have a LIAR President but his stooge lemmings are literally insane with crazed lust for this man.. anything to cover up for him.. It's breathtaking in it's entirety. These are so called Americans NO ONE can trust and you can bet your last dollar that if the day ever comes where gubmint asks Zombies like these to turn in fellow citizens who don't agree with them, these Zombies have a knife ready and waiting. They have ZERO loyalty for Americans and are true to one thing alone - LIBERALISM, their religion.


----------



## geauxtohell (Oct 30, 2012)

4Horsemen said:


> For reference to the topic:
> 
> *Treason*
> Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aiding or involved by such an endeavour.
> ...



That's not the legal definition of treason as defined by our laws.

DERP!


----------



## geauxtohell (Oct 30, 2012)

BluePhantom said:


> Pasco08 said:
> 
> 
> > This isn't a video game where an AC-130 can pinpoint and shoot and not kill any civi's People are honestly really shortsighted.
> ...



AREA KILL WEAPON.

Holy fuck this is painful.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> It is very possible that the AC 130 Gunship would have taken several lives of persons of many nationalities not to mention all hell breaking loose in every capitol of the Islamic world.  And I suppose you'd be fine with a country with embassies and consulates here here sending in close air combat support anytime there is a protest outside of their consulate/facilities here?
> 
> Let me guess, you think we play by different rules than they do, right?



You're an Obamabot, ergo none too bright; but can you offer links showing all of the murders of foreign diplomats perpetrated by Americans while those diplomats were in consulates withing the boarders of the continental United States? In fact, can you show ANY act of violence?

No?

So you are just lying for Obama? 

Obviously you'll lie for him, would you die for him?


----------



## geauxtohell (Oct 30, 2012)

You know, we had ICBMs too.  How come the administration didn't use the?

Incompetence!  Treason!  Yeeeaaarrrrgghhhhh!


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> *It's obvious that the Ambassador and the three men assassinated on September 11, 2012 mean very little to you and especially the fact that they were abandoned and refused aid three times by your dear leader. Then there's the fact that General Carter Ham was relieved of duty immediately after refusing to abandon the people in Ben Ghazi*



What matters to Phoenixops is his party obtaining power then retaining power.

The middle and right don't understand the left. The right operates on principle. There are certain ideals that drive the right; freedom of speech, the protection of innocent life, safeguarding the right of people to defend themselves, the right to freely negotiate deals with other free people, etc. The right seeks people and parties that support the principles they hold.

The right stumbles in thinking that the left is the same as them, but just with different principle. But the right is wrong about the left, the left has no principles. They have loyalty to party - period. Right or wrong are defined by party goals, and can change in an instant to meet with party objectives. The left is utterly and completely free of any hint of integrity, they are not encumbered by notions of morality or honor - only party matters. Leftists will say or do anything to promote the party. Some think that exposing Obama for a liar and a fool will sway the left - it won't. Gauxtohell and Candycorn already know that Obama lied and betrayed these men - they just don't happen to give a fuck - they serve the party, they have ZERO integrity. If Obama raped and murdered a 6 year old boy on national TV, they would be scrambling to spin it so that damage to the party was minimized.

The left doesn't give a fuck about facts, they serve the party.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

Liberal said:


> I think the real question, if this is true is more over what a GUNSHIP would do..
> 
> Vaporize the entire embassy, with our people in it?



No, where did you get such a stupid idea?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJjRQLbiEyg]Call of duty 4 - AC130 - YouTube[/ame]

Standard Disclaimer: Yes, it's from COD4, but well demonstrates how this thing works.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

geauxtohell said:


> You know, we had ICBMs too.  How come the administration didn't use the?
> 
> Incompetence!  Treason!  Yeeeaaarrrrgghhhhh!



it's rather amusing watching the lunatics from the right wing jump the shark.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

IHBF said:


> What was the proximity of these innocent civilians to the mortars locations?



Muslims tend to set up firing perches in the midst of children, to use them as human shields. Chances are the mortar emplacements were directly in the middle of a group of children, it's the Muslim way.


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Wehrwolfen said:
> 
> 
> > *It's obvious that the Ambassador and the three men assassinated on September 11, 2012 mean very little to you and especially the fact that they were abandoned and refused aid three times by your dear leader. Then there's the fact that General Carter Ham was relieved of duty immediately after refusing to abandon the people in Ben Ghazi*
> ...


----------



## Vel (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> BluePhantom said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Ty Woods had painted the target. A gunship would not have been strafing the crowd. Why must you try to obfuscate the facts? The "fog of war" argument died the moment that news came out that our guys were in radio contact with superiors. Our fighters on the ground were telling what was going on and where help was needed. Obama and his administration as well as their cohorts in the media are trying to bury this story because it's shows that Obama is not competent to be CinC.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> It's crazy to bring this up because, again, using this aircraft to disperse a crowd is a bit like dropping the A-bomb.



"Dispersing a crowd" would assume the lie about the YouTube video was true - which would be stupid.

So the AC-130 would be used to pacify mortar emplacements. And for that, it is just perfect.


----------



## geauxtohell (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:
			
		

> Standard Disclaimer: Yes, it's from COD4, but well demonstrates how this thing works.



There could not be a more excellent example of the blatent stupidity that permeates this thread......


----------



## geauxtohell (Oct 30, 2012)

I especially like he the AC 130 dropped a 105 round on the LZ as the chinook was landing.

Just like the real thing!


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> it's rather amusing watching the lunatics from the right wing jump the shark.



So you think a 25mm cannon is the same as a nuke?

I'd say you just jumped the binder.


----------



## jwoodie (Oct 30, 2012)

1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.

2.  It demonstrates the unconscionable elevation of politics over protection of American citizens.

3.  It demonstrates pervasive corruption/coverup  throughout the Executive Branch of our government.

4.  It demonstrates the pervasive corruption of journalism in our mainstream media.

5.  It demonstrates the corruption of political partisans who support their candidate no matter what harm is done to their country.


----------



## kaaazuo (Oct 30, 2012)

Meathead said:


> It is obvious that the administration was aware of what happened and failed to act in a timely manner. Any way you spin it, it was a complete breakdown which cost lives.
> 
> As common with scandals, especially in a politically sensitive time such as this, a cover-up would not be unthinkable. Obama is going to have to throw a lot of people under the bus to avoid responsibility. It would be an odious start to a second administration if he is to win. His disapproval ratings would likely set new records in  a matter of months.



If Obama wins the election, he would have set himself up for impeachment, conviction and removal from office. Biden would face the same fate since he was with Obama and a partner in crime. The next in line to take over the Presidency will be House Majority Leader, Boehner.


----------



## BlindBoo (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> BlindBoo said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet-talking will get you nowhere you rabid-puppy.
> ...



I never ruled out the possibility that the video and the riots throughout the various Muslim countries had something to do with it.  If nothing more than to obfuscate the motive of those responible.


----------



## konradv (Oct 30, 2012)

jwoodie said:


> 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> 
> 2.  It demonstrates the unconscionable elevation of politics over protection of American citizens.
> 
> ...



I think the right has overplayed its hand on this one.  The American people can recognize the cynical usage of death for poltical gain when they see it.  They're a lot more likely to take the word of Panetta, Powell and Rice than any number of ultra-CON blowhards.


----------



## GuyPinestra (Oct 30, 2012)

jwoodie said:


> 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> 
> 2.  It demonstrates the unconscionable elevation of politics over protection of American citizens.
> 
> ...



Short, sweet, to the point and irrefutable...

Reps on way!


----------



## jwoodie (Oct 30, 2012)

konradv said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> ...



*Thank you for proving #5.*


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> I never ruled out the possibility that the video and the riots throughout the various Muslim countries had something to do with it.  If nothing more than to obfuscate the motive of those responible.



So that's what the hate sites are retreating to, right? "Obama called it a terrorist attack on Sept. 12 - but if we're lying, then it was all a spontaneous protest of a 4 month old YouTube video that had 11 views. Because all protestors bring mortars and RPG's with them."

If you steal the election through fraud, you still won't "win." Obama will be impeached over this. You know that, right?


----------



## TNHarley (Oct 30, 2012)

It does matter. I feel sorry for the casualties.. I do not feel sorry for the sorry administration.


----------



## konradv (Oct 30, 2012)

jwoodie said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



Romney's Jeeps-to-China lie fits #5 better than anything Obama's done.  Kiss Ohio and Michigan good-bye.


----------



## kaaazuo (Oct 30, 2012)

Meathead said:


> Franticfrank said:
> 
> 
> > This isn't call of duty. Firing with a 105mm howitzer from an AC130 into a crowd (armed and unarmed) around the consulate would create worse ramifications than Stevens' death.
> ...



This always happens when lawyers are presented a situation. They wring their hands. 

This is why the lawyer's place is to sit beside the leader who makes the call.


----------



## TNHarley (Oct 30, 2012)

konradv said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...



So a lie harms the country? Exactly, your post does not mean anything.


----------



## konradv (Oct 30, 2012)

TNHarley said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



It does if it gets him elected, but the voters in Ohio and Michigan seem to be getting wise to Romney.


----------



## Nole (Oct 30, 2012)

This mess in Libya points out the flaw in Republican foreign policy. 

Lets not forget who put Kadaffi in power, its not that long ago we put a few of these dictators into a position of power. Its no wonder this part of the world is a tender box.


So ya, Libya does matter. It shows the mistakes we have made over the decades. Think about it, if Libya was not our little science project in the past, maybe we would not have a dead American hero.

Any well educated, well read American is not going to pin this on Obama as this mess made in Libya has been in motion for decades. 


My main question to the Obama admin is WTF was an American even doing in Libya. Its not exactly that safest place to be. However, im my eyes, Libya is small potatoes compared to Iraq. The debt collected in Iraq is and will be a true hit to nation security.


----------



## GuyPinestra (Oct 30, 2012)

konradv said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...



You keep chanting, Konrad...

And light another incense, too...


----------



## AmericanFirst (Oct 30, 2012)

konradv said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> ...


The word of those lefty fools has been proven to be full of holes. Anyone believing them are not very smart. Idiots.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Oct 30, 2012)

konradv said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...


Idiot.


----------



## jwoodie (Oct 30, 2012)

Nole said:


> This mess in Libya points out the flaw in Republican foreign policy.
> 
> Lets not forget who put Kadaffi in power, its not that long ago we put a few of these dictators into a position of power. Its no wonder this part of the world is a tender box.
> 
> ...



*Typical left wing deflection devoid of facts or logic.  As to Iraq, our objective SHOULD have been to establish a permanent base (Status of Forces Agreement) to keep Iran in check.  Instead, we have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.*


----------



## konradv (Oct 30, 2012)

AmericanFirst said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



OOOOHHHH..., that hurt's.  It's apparent the righties are beside themselves with worry, Benghazi isn't taking and Mitt just shot himself in the foot.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Oct 30, 2012)

konradv said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...


Not. Benghazi matters because it proves how much of an incompetent fool obamaturd and anyone who believes him is. Idiot.


----------



## konradv (Oct 30, 2012)

AmericanFirst said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > AmericanFirst said:
> ...



The only thing Americans care about Re:benghazi is the how the Reps are trying to make political hay out of deaths and they're disgusted.  What's more important is the economy and Mitt's willingness to lie about what's happening.  Kiss Ohio and Michigan good-bye.  Happy retirement, Mitt.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Oct 30, 2012)

konradv said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...


The only thing TRUE Americans care about is the fact that obamaturd and his admin sat there and watched and refused to do anything while the attack was happening and then LIED about the fact they knew and tried to blame a video when the blame is on obamaturds shoulders. IDIOT!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Conservative (Oct 30, 2012)

> _Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer (ret.) is a former senior intelligence officer and the New York Times bestselling author of Operation "DARK HEART: Spycraft an Special Operations on the Frontlines of Afghanistan &#8211; And The Path to Victory."  He is the Director of External Communications for the Center for Advanced Defense Studies (CADS) and Senior Advisor on the Congressional Task Force on National and Homeland Security._



To live and die in Benghazi, Libya without leadership from America | Fox News



> What is it like to spend your last moments on earth fighting for your life?
> 
> To have devoted your life, and your life's work, to a great nation -- to serve it well and honorably -- and serve for it with courage and distinction, to all come down to a last, frantic few seconds, spent defending you and your fellow Americans and call for the cavalry to come help,  and no cavalry comes--and you die.
> 
> This is what the two former Navy SEALs, under the employment of CIA, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, faced in their final moments in Benghazi on September 11, 2012.





> This is what we now stand for now, as a nation?  To have invested billions in intelligence and special operations forces to hang back, play it safe?
> 
> To have general officers serve NOT as "Monday morning quarterbacks" but as "Monday morning apologists"  for the WH saying "it was just too hard" or "the uncertainty was a key factor" - are you kidding me?  Conventional thinking obtains you conventional (and in this case tragic) results - four dead Americans.





> The request for help was sent by these brave, now dead, men - at least three times.  The answer was "no".
> 
> Someone made the decision to not send help.  Who?
> 
> The decision would have been that of one man - the president.





> There was a similar decision profile in October 1983, regarding a little place known as Grenada.
> 
> There was a tense meeting in the White House situation room of President Reagan's cabinet.  After a short debate on the issues, Reagan called for a vote to use military force to rescue the Americans.
> 
> ...





> There was huge uncertainty...
> There was also a lack of intelligence...
> 
> Oh, yeah- and President Reagan did not even inform our closest ally, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, of the invasion.  Grenada was a British protectorate.  He apologized later.
> ...



Reagan... Presidential

Obama...coward or inept... take your pick.


----------



## BlindBoo (Oct 30, 2012)

Of course Benhgazi matters.  All terrorist attacks matter and we need to punish the terrorists responsible.  However to Faux News the dead Americans don't really matter all that much, all that matters is to try and use their deaths as a political tool against the President.  Just like they tried to do with that ATF gun walking program.  

"Watergate!  It's Obama's Watergate"  they try and equivocate.  But they've been doing that for 4 years now.......they are so much like the "Boy who cried Wolfe", it's pathetic.


----------



## Vel (Oct 30, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> Of course Benhgazi matters.  All terrorist attacks matter and we need to punish the terrorists responsible.  However to Faux News the dead Americans don't really matter all that much, all that matters is to try and use their deaths as a political tool against the President.  Just like they tried to do with that ATF gun walking program.
> 
> "Watergate!  It's Obama's Watergate"  they try and equivocate.  But they've been doing that for 4 years now.......they are so much like the "Boy who cried Wolfe", it's pathetic.



So you don't care if those on the ground were asking for help and that help was denied? That doesn't bother you?


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

jwoodie said:


> 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> 
> 2.  It demonstrates the unconscionable elevation of politics over protection of American citizens.
> 
> ...



All so very true.


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

jwoodie said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



You beat me to it.


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

konradv said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...



People died needlessly you partisan hack moron!


----------



## BlindBoo (Oct 30, 2012)

Conservative said:


> > _Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer (ret.) is a former senior intelligence officer and the New York Times bestselling author of Operation "DARK HEART: Spycraft an Special Operations on the Frontlines of Afghanistan  And The Path to Victory."  He is the Director of External Communications for the Center for Advanced Defense Studies (CADS) and Senior Advisor on the Congressional Task Force on National and Homeland Security._
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Cut-n-Run Ronnie Raygun?  Presidential?  The hell you say!

The shipments were personally approved by Reagan in apparent contravention of the Export Administration Act, which prohibits the sale of U.S.-made arms to countries that support terrorism. Reagan himself put Iran on the "terrorist" list in 1981

U.S. SENT IRAN ARMS FOR HOSTAGE RELEASES; WEAPONS WERE SUPPLIED FOR AID IN FREEING 3 IN LEBANON, GOVERNMENT SOURCES SAY


----------



## GuyPinestra (Oct 30, 2012)

Vel said:


> BlindBoo said:
> 
> 
> > Of course Benhgazi matters.  All terrorist attacks matter and we need to punish the terrorists responsible.  However to Faux News the dead Americans don't really matter all that much, all that matters is to try and use their deaths as a political tool against the President.  Just like they tried to do with that ATF gun walking program.
> ...



Please BooBoo, answer THIS!!


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 30, 2012)

You know if the right-wing could stop crying and actually pick some relevant things to attack the President on instead of all these utterly retarded attacks that just drown each other out, they might actually have a reasonable argument.


----------



## jwoodie (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> You know if the right-wing could stop crying and actually pick some relevant things to attack the President on instead of all these utterly retarded attacks that just drown each other out, they might actually have a reasonable argument.



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Unworthy of response^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 30, 2012)

jwoodie said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > You know if the right-wing could stop crying and actually pick some relevant things to attack the President on instead of all these utterly retarded attacks that just drown each other out, they might actually have a reasonable argument.
> ...



And yet you still did. 

Seriously though, this whole Benghazi thing is going to be like every other bullshit thing out of the right-wing in the last four years. The right-wing will scream and bitch about it trying to get everyone's attention. Then when they realize no one cares, they'll move to screaming and bitching about the next inconsequential thing. Four Americans died in a shit hole country that hates Americans. These things happen and will continue to happen. C'est la vie.


----------



## Claudette (Oct 30, 2012)

konradv said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> ...



Oh I don't think the right has overplayed anything. 

If anything the lefts willingness to defend Barry and his fuckup State Department are overplayed. Hell. He sent all his minions out trying to convince everyone it was a demonstration, not a terrorist attack. He also tried to blame it on a video that no one ever heard of. He told Tyson Woods Dad that the maker would be prosecuted. Jesus. 

Hell. He obviously thinks we are all dumb as dirt and he's pretty much hoisted himself on his own petard. 

I've heard loads of comments on this issue and everyone of them condems Barry and his State Department for the way the whole thing was handled. 

Loads of sorrow over the needless deaths of 4 Americans and absolute disgust over the fact that there was nothing done to aide them.


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> You know if the right-wing could stop crying and actually pick some relevant things to attack the President on instead of all these utterly retarded attacks that just drown each other out, they might actually have a reasonable argument.



So you are saying that the deaths of 4 people, while obama and his staff watched and did nothing, and then obama's lie to the public is perfectly fine and nothing worth bringing up? is that what you mean?


----------



## GuyPinestra (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> You know if the right-wing could stop crying and actually pick some relevant things to attack the President on instead of all these utterly retarded attacks that just drown each other out, they might actually have a reasonable argument.



I guess the thought has never crossed your mind that it is the President that is 'retarded'...

And can you please give us a list of these 'retarded' attacks?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

konradv said:


> Romney's Jeeps-to-China lie fits #5 better than anything Obama's done.  Kiss Ohio and Michigan good-bye.



{Fiat is in very detailed conversations with its Chinese partner, Guangzhou Automobile Group Co. (2238), about making Jeeps in the worlds largest auto market, said Mike Manley, chief operating officer of Fiat and Chrysler in Asia. Chrysler hasnt built Jeeps there since before Fiat took control in 2009.

The volume opportunity for us is very significant, Manley, who is also president of the Jeep brand, said in an interview at Chryslers Auburn Hills, Michigan, headquarters. *Were reviewing the opportunities within existing capacity as well as should we be localizing the entire Jeep portfolio or some of the Jeep portfolio.
*
Chrysler, which entered an alliance with Turin, Italy-based Fiat as part of its U.S. government-backed bankruptcy, is relying on growth in China to counter weakness in Europes auto market. The automaker is targeting 500,000 annual sales outside North America by 2014, more than triple its overseas deliveries in 2009. }

Fiat Says Jeep Output May Return to China as Demand Rises - Bloomberg

Sergio Marchionne, an Obama supporter (duh, Obama handed him a billion dollars of U.S. taxpayer money,) directly contradicted his Jeep brand president. We call it "backtracking when busted."


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

Nole said:


> This mess in Libya points out the flaw in Republican foreign policy.
> 
> Lets not forget who put Kadaffi in power, its not that long ago we put a few of these dictators into a position of power. Its no wonder this part of the world is a tender box.
> 
> ...



You use a LOT of drugs, don't you?


----------



## BlindBoo (Oct 30, 2012)

Vel said:


> BlindBoo said:
> 
> 
> > Of course Benhgazi matters.  All terrorist attacks matter and we need to punish the terrorists responsible.  However to Faux News the dead Americans don't really matter all that much, all that matters is to try and use their deaths as a political tool against the President.  Just like they tried to do with that ATF gun walking program.
> ...



Faux News has a habit of picking their talking points out of context of the larger picture.  Like showing a businessman a short clip of a President speech saying "If you've got a business......you didn't build that"  and then asking the businessman "Does that bother you?"  So I'll wait until more facts are released.  Since their looniest are on this story like flies on shit I'm betting it's not getting much traction.


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 30, 2012)

GuyPinestra said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > You know if the right-wing could stop crying and actually pick some relevant things to attack the President on instead of all these utterly retarded attacks that just drown each other out, they might actually have a reasonable argument.
> ...



Birth Certificate
Death Panels (THEY GONNA KILL YOUR GRANDMA!)
Obama's gonna shut down the intrawebz!!! 
Telepromters

This is just off the top of my head. A lot of it is just a blur because it seems like every quarter there's some new retarded talking point.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

GuyPinestra said:


> Please BooBoo, answer THIS!!



Boo cares that Benghazi has hurt Obama in the polls.

Beyond that, well....


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> GuyPinestra said:
> 
> 
> > BallsBrunswick said:
> ...




So the deaths of 4 people and obama's lie about it are nothing more than those trivial things?


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 30, 2012)

PredFan said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > GuyPinestra said:
> ...



When did he lie about it? And again, it sucks that they died but it's not an indictment on his administration like the right wing is trying to make it out to be.


----------



## jwoodie (Oct 30, 2012)

PredFan said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > GuyPinestra said:
> ...



*^^^^^^^^^^^^Point, Set, Match^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^*


----------



## Vel (Oct 30, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> Vel said:
> 
> 
> > BlindBoo said:
> ...



 That doesn't answer the question. If it comes out that Obama was in the situation room and knew that Americans, under attack, were requesting help and he did nothing, are you going to have a problem with that?


----------



## Vel (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > BallsBrunswick said:
> ...



How do you know this is not an indictment on Obama's administration? The American public hasn't been given any facts from this WhiteHouse. It has been 7 weeks and all we're getting out of the WhiteHouse is that they don't know what happened. And if they truly don't know what happened after 7 weeks, does that not scream incompetence?


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > BallsBrunswick said:
> ...



He lied when he told the American people that it was because of the movie. Then he agaiin lied when he told the middle east that it was because of the movie. He lied to cover his ineffectual ass.


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

Harry Reid and the Senate are going to begin a full investigation of what happened at the embassy in Libya..........................after the election.


----------



## Conservative (Oct 30, 2012)

Is Bush was in the White house right now, and this had happened exactly like this, there isn't a libtard in the country that would not be calling for his head.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> When did he lie about it? And again, it sucks that they died but it's not an indictment on his administration like the right wing is trying to make it out to be.



The question isn't "when did Obama lie about it," you already know the answer.

Benghazi: Four Americans Died, Obama Lied, And The Press Complied - Forbes

The question is why you continue to lie?

But we already know, you hold party above country and have zero integrity.


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 30, 2012)

Vel said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



it's a matter of national security why would they release details about it? Four people died in a clusterfuck in a shit hole country. I'm confused how this event is Obama's fault. Did Obama arm and encourage the terrorists?



PredFan said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



You know this how?

Even your own neo-cons are saying this argument is stupid.


----------



## mamooth (Oct 30, 2012)

The righty sheep acted just as badly with Fast & Furious, and we know how that turned out. See "The Boy who Cried Wolf." Most people now correctly assume that FOX and the Republicans lie about everything.

That's why no one is paying any attention to this latest phony-outrage routine. That really flusters the righties. They fell hard for the conspiracy, and they can't understand why the rest of the country hasn't fallen for it too. They simply don't get that most of America isn't as gullible as they are.


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > When did he lie about it? And again, it sucks that they died but it's not an indictment on his administration like the right wing is trying to make it out to be.
> ...



 Yeah, that's certainly fair and balanced reporting.

And I'm not a democrat or a liberal. I just hate idiots.


----------



## BlindBoo (Oct 30, 2012)

Vel said:


> BlindBoo said:
> 
> 
> > Vel said:
> ...



If is the most powerful word in the universe.

Following a pair of denials by the CIA and the National Security Council to a Fox News story published Friday, the Pentagon has come under scrutiny for its response to the assault on the U.S. compound in Benghazi. However, in a statement to The Atlantic Wire, a senior defense official says the Pentagon never rejected requests for military intervention in Benghazi. Not only that, the official said no such requests were ever made. 

"The Pentagon took action by moving personnel and assets in the region shortly after it learned of the attack on the Benghazi consulate," said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity. "There was no request made for military intervention in Benghazi. To be successful, such an operation, if requested, would have required solid information about what was happening on the ground. Such clarity just wasn't available as the attack was unfolding."

The statement follows a loud outcry from conservative critics in wake of a report by Fox News that armed CIA operatives near the U.S. compound in Benghazi were repeatedly told to "stand down" after asking for permission to assist on the night of Sept. 11. According to Fox News national security reporter Jennifer Griffin, former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a CIA outfit one mile away from the U.S. compound housing Ambassador Chris Stevens. "When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out," reported Griffin. "They were told to 'stand down,' ... Soon after, they were again told to 'stand down.'" The report also said that repeated requests for outside military backup were denied.

But the report did not say who denied those requests. Was it the CIA? The Pentagon? The White House? Critics of the administration want to know in their efforts to assign blame for the tragedy. On Monday morning, MSNBC's Joe Scarborough asked that very question to President Obama who said the matter was still under investigation and he couldn't give further comment. "If we find out we that there was a big breakdown, and somebody didn't do their job, they'll be held accountable," he said. Meanwhile, the agencies involved with the Benghazi attack have been issuing independent denials.

Pentagon Denies Fox News Benghazi Report - Global - The Atlantic Wire

Yep if there was really a wolfe attacking that boy this time......opps, guess not!


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 30, 2012)

mamooth said:


> The righty sheep acted just as badly with Fast & Furious, and we know how that turned out. See "The Boy who Cried Wolf." Most people now correctly assume that FOX and the Republicans lie about everything.
> 
> That's why no one is paying any attention to this latest phony-outrage routine. That really flusters the righties. They fell hard for the conspiracy, and they can't understand why the rest of the country hasn't fallen for it too. They simply don't get that most of America isn't as gullible as they are.



You just summed up what I'm trying to say perfectly. Thank you.


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> Vel said:
> 
> 
> > BallsBrunswick said:
> ...



Ok, you've established yourself firmly as a partisan hack who will say any stupid thing it takes to defend a failure of a president.

Have fun with that, i'll waste no more time with you.

Dismissed.


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 30, 2012)

PredFan said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > Vel said:
> ...



So, I'm guessing you can't answer the questions so in your little shill mind you have to dismiss it. Okay, go on with your bullshit propaganda, no one is really listening anymore anyway. I can't wait for the next big scandal you people cook up. Oh god, Obama ate all the mashed potatoes at thanksgiving... FUCKING TREASON!


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> Yeah, that's certainly fair and balanced reporting.



Forbes?



> And I'm not a democrat or a liberal. I just hate idiots.



You're a partisan hack and an Obamabot. You have zero integrity and will say anything that you think will further the power of the democratic party.


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, that's certainly fair and balanced reporting.
> ...



This article you posted makes a bunch of baseless claims and then calls for Obama's removal at the end.  

You're a paranoid fear monger who's living in a world of delusion.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> You just summed up what I'm trying to say perfectly. Thank you.



Of course he did. After all, he read it off of ThinkProgress just like you did....


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > BallsBrunswick said:
> ...



Obama did blame the attacks on a spur of the moment uprising over a movie trailer that up to that point, nobody even heard of.  It is clear that he knew otherwise at the time he said that as it is also clear he, or someone in the admin, left our people unprotected and they are now dead.

If it were Barrack Obama (R)....  you'd be shitting yourselves over this and it would be on the 24/7 news cycle.


----------



## R.D. (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> When did he lie about it? And again, it sucks that they died but it's not an indictment on his administration like the right wing is trying to make it out to be.



Obama says in a speech Tuesday Sept. 25  before the U.N. General Assembly that "there are no words that excuse the killing of innocent" and "no video that justifies an attack on an embassy."...the video "is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well."

 What  sucks is that it is an indictment on his administration


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 30, 2012)

Soggy in NOLA said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



At the time, how do we know that's not what happened? There's not enough information right now to make an intelligent judgement on this whole thing. However, what's irritating is the right wing has picked up this event and put it into it's spin cycle so now it's just an utter clusterfuck where one side is screaming bloody murder regardless of facts and the other side is just confused. 

And if this happened to a Republican president I would think the same thing. A shitty riot in a shitty county on the other side of the world is not an indictment on the President.


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

Soggy in NOLA said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Exactly.

All it takes is the minimum of intelligence, and a minimum of searching to put two and two together. The lefties won't even attempt it. they will say any stupid thing to avoid having to admit that they are wrong or admit that their beloved ruler could do anything wrong.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> This article you posted makes a bunch of baseless claims and then calls for Obama's removal at the end.



The article is from left-leaning Forbes, and is well documented.



> You're a paranoid fear monger who's living in a world of delusion.



You're a partisan hack who will say anything to protect Obama and promote your shameful party.

{Contrary to his boast, Mr. Obama did not single out Benghazi as an act of terrorism in his Sept. 12 Rose Garden statement. He referred to it as an attack and to the perpetrators as killers. He then said, We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, an obvious reference to the YouTube video to which he alluded as the motive for the mayhem. Later he said, No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, but this was in the context of Sept. 11, 2001, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It wasnt a direct reference to Benghazi. The presidential proclamation on Benghazi, issued the same day, made no reference to terrorism. That evening, however, Undersecretary of State Patrick F. Kennedy, whose portfolio includes overseas facilities and operations, called Benghazi a terrorist attack in a private conference call with congressional staff.

On Sept. 14, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney claimed the spate of Mideast unrest, including the Benghazi assault, was in response to a video that Muslims find offensive. He avoided calling those who attacked the Benghazi consulate terrorists, referring instead to assailants and attackers. The same day, Mr. Obama attended the transfer-of-remains ceremony for the Benghazi fallen and made no reference to terrorism in his remarks. In his weekly address on Sept. 15, Mr. Obama made much of the denigration of Islam and angry mobs but said nothing of terrorism. On Sept. 16, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice was dispatched to the Sunday talk-show circuit to state authoritatively that the attacks were spontaneous  not premeditated and in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated.}

EDITORIAL: Obama&#39;s Benghazi lie - Washington Times


----------



## BlindBoo (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> GuyPinestra said:
> 
> 
> > Please BooBoo, answer THIS!!
> ...



The only reason Faux tried this false story is to try and Swift-boat the President.  Most normal people are aware of this tactic.  Looks like it didn't work.  Not even close.  The poll numbers on foriegn policy seem to be increasing for the President.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 30, 2012)

_Why the AC130s were grounded: Obama didnt want voters to find out that he had armed the jihadists with SAMs​_ *[Reader Post]


By: Alec Rawls

Its simple logic. In Libya there is only one possible threat to an AC130 gunship: surface to air missiles. Thus this is the only way Panetta wasnt lying when he said that it was lack of information about the threat environment that kept him from sending defenders into harms way in Benghazi. He must have been afraid that the jihadists were lying in wait with surface to air missiles, and he had good reason to suspect such a ploy. *
Continue reading &#8594;
Why the AC130s were grounded: Obama didnt want voters to find out that he had armed the jihadists with SAMs [Reader Post] | Flopping Aces


----------



## GuyPinestra (Oct 30, 2012)

mamooth said:


> The righty sheep acted just as badly with Fast & Furious, and we know how that turned out. See "The Boy who Cried Wolf." Most people now correctly assume that FOX and the Republicans lie about everything.
> 
> That's why no one is paying any attention to this latest phony-outrage routine. That really flusters the righties. They fell hard for the conspiracy, and they can't understand why the rest of the country hasn't fallen for it too. They simply don't get that most of America isn't as gullible as they are.



If you think F&F is a dead issue you're not thinking. 

Executive Privilege can be revoked by the Court, and the truth WILL come out.

And what LEGITIMATE purpose is there for EP? It's use has very limited parameters...


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

R.D. said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > When did he lie about it? And again, it sucks that they died but it's not an indictment on his administration like the right wing is trying to make it out to be.
> ...



The only conclusions that can be drawn are:

1. The obama administration is appallingly incompetent.
2. Obama was in "cover your ass" mode.


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 30, 2012)

Well it seems we're at an empasse here. I don't think there's enough information available to make an intelligent evaluation of the situation nor do I see a reason to attack the President over this. You people are jumping up and down in outrage on the latest right wing anti-Obama trend that'll be replaced in a few weeks by some new outrage.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> The only reason Faux tried this false story is to try and Swift-boat the President.  Most normal people are aware of this tactic.  Looks like it didn't work.  Not even close.  The poll numbers on foriegn policy seem to be increasing for the President.



So then, you don't give a fuck about Obama's lies or incompetence, only about your party winning?

And the poll numbers show WHAT?

*WH2012: General*


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

jwoodie said:


> 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> 
> 2.  It demonstrates the unconscionable elevation of politics over protection of American citizens.
> 
> ...



Which of course is bullshit.

Letting Gaddafi off for Lockerbie..by paying blood money is what the Bush administration did in Libya.

Going after Gaddafi when he was threatening genocide is what the Obama administration did.


----------



## GuyPinestra (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> Well it seems we're at an empasse here. I don't think there's enough information available to make an intelligent evaluation of the situation nor do I see a reason to attack the President over this. You people are jumping up and down in outrage on the latest right wing anti-Obama trend that'll be replaced in a few weeks by some new outrage.



Did you ever think that outrages are caused by the outrageous?


----------



## mamooth (Oct 30, 2012)

Soggy in NOLA said:


> If it were Barrack Obama (R)....  you'd be shitting yourselves over this and it would be on the 24/7 news cycle.



History says you're full of crap. Embassy attacks happened under Bush, several times. The Democrats never had a meltdown over it. 

Remember, we here on the left are not like you. We refuse to tapdance on American corpses for political gain. That sort of vile hypocritical behavior is solely displayed by Republicans. Like the old Soviet Communists, modern American Republicans are only loyal to their party, not their country.


----------



## R.D. (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> Well it seems we're at an empasse here. I don't think there's enough information available to make an intelligent evaluation of the situation nor do I see a reason to attack the President over this. You people are jumping up and down in outrage on the latest right wing anti-Obama trend that'll be replaced in a few weeks by some new outrage.



In other words, I like the lies don't confuse me with facts


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

Sallow said:


> Which of course is bullshit.
> 
> Letting Gaddafi off for Lockerbie..by paying blood money is what the Bush administration did in Libya.
> 
> Going after Gaddafi when he was threatening genocide is what the Obama administration did.



The lies you hacks tell....

{At least 100 people have died after USA planes bombed targets in the Libyan capital, Tripoli, and the Benghazi region.

Around 66 American jets, some of them flying from British bases launched an attack at around 0100hrs on Monday.

The White House spokesman, Larry Speakes, has said that the strike was directed at key military sites but reports suggest that missiles also hit Bin Ashur, a densely populated suburb in the capital.

Colonel Muamar Gaddafi residential compound took a direct hit that killed Hanna Gaddafi, the adopted baby daughter of the Libyan leader.

President Reagan has justified the attacks by accusing Libya of direct responsibility for terrorism aimed at America, such as the bombing of La Belle discoteque in West Berlin 10 days ago. }

BBC ON THIS DAY | 15 | 1986: US launches air strikes on Libya


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 30, 2012)

_The one piece of information that would explain everything​_ *[Reader Post]

 By: DrJohn



When you listen to Jennifer Griffin describe a plea from the Americans at the consulate one thing stands out


Where the blank is the Spectre?

THE Spectre. Not air support. THE Spectre. Not a Spectre. THE Spectre.

A Spectre gunship was expected. 

Thus heres the one piece of information which would explain everything. 

Continue reading &#8594;
The one piece of information that would explain everything [Reader Post] | Flopping Aces*


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

mamooth said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> > If it were Barrack Obama (R)....  you'd be shitting yourselves over this and it would be on the 24/7 news cycle.
> ...



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX1lBOxoJeU]Rangel Responds to Chavez - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 30, 2012)

GuyPinestra said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > Well it seems we're at an empasse here. I don't think there's enough information available to make an intelligent evaluation of the situation nor do I see a reason to attack the President over this. You people are jumping up and down in outrage on the latest right wing anti-Obama trend that'll be replaced in a few weeks by some new outrage.
> ...



I paid attention for the first few years and I think there's a lot of valid criticism of Obama. I personally think he's only marginally effective and I have a lot of things I'm angry about with his Administration. But the sheer volume of bullshit, lies, and whining from the right-wing has effectively made me (as well as most of America) tune them out. And I don't consider this event to be outrageous.

Personally, I think it's outrageous that Obama goes on late night television and makes jokes about doing drugs back in the day while millions of Americans have had their lives destroyed by the same thing.


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 30, 2012)

This is the dumbest fucking thing I've ever read on here.


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > Which of course is bullshit.
> ...



You even read the shit you post.



> President Reagan has justified the attacks by accusing Libya of direct responsibility for terrorism aimed at America, such as the bombing of *La Belle discoteque in West Berlin 10 days ago. *



There was no conclusive evidence Libya was involved by the way.

And Lockerbie was revenge for that bombing by Reagan.

As I was alive and remember that..you don't get away with Bullshit.


----------



## konradv (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > Which of course is bullshit.
> ...



That just sounds like you're bashing the military for not being prefect.  Obama wasn't flying those jets.  That being said, I think Americans are more concerned about Romney lying about Jeeps-to-China.  He can kiss MI and Oh good-bye.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

mamooth said:


> History says you're full of crap. Embassy attacks happened under Bush, several times. The Democrats never had a meltdown over it.



Really? Care to cite that?



> Remember, we here on the left are not like you.



No, you're sure not.

The right is based on principle and integrity, you of the left are loyal to the party. You have no actual principles, just what the party is promoting at a given moment.



> We refuse to tapdance on American corpses for political gain.



Right.

{ Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) sparked a furious response from the right last year when he said the Iraq war is lost.

Bush announced in September that the surge policy of additional troops would allow a gradual reduction in forces as a return on success. Improvements in Iraq helped revive the presidential campaign of Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), now the front-runner for the Republican nomination}

Pelosi calls Iraq a 'failure' - Mike Allen - POLITICO.com

Oh, I guess you were just lying - you're a leftist and thus without so much as a hint of integrity - so I understand.



> That sort of vile hypocritical behavior is solely displayed by Republicans. Like the old Soviet Communists, modern American Republicans are only loyal to their party, not their country.



Yeah, you hacks are 100% supportive.

{According to the Defense Department, we have now lost 4,082 men and women in Bush's war of choice in Iraq and we should not allow the man who sent them needlessly to their deaths to lead our nation today in mourning their loss. Make no mistake about it, George W. Bush is as responsible for the deaths of those men and women as if he himself had fired the bullet or set the IEDs that ended their lives.}

The Huffington Post's Memorial Day: Bush Is a Murderer | NewsBusters.org

Oh wait, guess you were lying. Hey, you have a party to support - no room for integrity.


----------



## Freemason9 (Oct 30, 2012)

It's also possible that a nation can't just send attack helicopters into other sovereign nations whenever they feel like it. Funny how the right wing hasn't figured that out yet. For some reason, they seem to think that is an OK thing to do.


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> > History says you're full of crap. Embassy attacks happened under Bush, several times. The Democrats never had a meltdown over it.
> ...



You know if you read this and imagine a rim shot after each sentence, it's actually kind of funny. Come to think of it, that's how I'll read this shill's posts from now on.


----------



## geauxtohell (Oct 30, 2012)

We have people making statements on tactical effects of a weapon platform based on their experiences with them via video games.  

'Nuff said.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

Sallow said:


> You even read the shit you post.



Sure, Reagan punished Libya for all their terrorist acts, despite the lies you tell,



> There was no conclusive evidence Libya was involved by the way.



Sigh, more lies.

{ Fifteen years after the air raids, a German court ruled that the Libyan secret service was responsible for the West Berlin bomb attack.

In September 2004, Libya agreed to pay $35m to 150 non-US victims of the 1986 Berlin disco bomb. }



> And Lockerbie was revenge for that bombing by Reagan.



First of all hack, George Bush was in charge of the Lockerbei aftermath, not Reagan;

{Following a three-year joint investigation by Scottish police and the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, murder warrants were issued for two Libyan nationals in November 1991. Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi eventually handed over the two men for trial at Camp Zeist, Netherlands in 1999 after protracted negotiations and UN sanctions.}

Pan Am Flight 103 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> As I was alive and remember that..you don't get away with Bullshit.



Yes, but you have zero integrity, so you openly lie about it. Bush did what the left wanted, and pursued it as a criminal act.


----------



## Murf76 (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> Well it seems we're at an empasse here. I don't think there's enough information available to make an intelligent evaluation of the situation nor do I see a reason to attack the President over this. You people are jumping up and down in outrage on the latest right wing anti-Obama trend that'll be replaced in a few weeks by some new outrage.



The only "impasse" going on here is the inability of you Obama supporters to think critically...  Fact vs. Liberal brain, or lack thereof.

This thing was a fuck-up from start to finish and at every step along the way.  And the idea that this administration is going to get another chance to "investigate" itself and find itself completely innocent of any wrongdoing like they did with Fast & Furious is wishful thinking.
WE DON'T LEAVE OUR OWN PEOPLE BEHIND IN A FIREFIGHT.  And that's what they did.

It was the anniversary of *9/11* for pete's sake.  There had already been requests for additional security but those requests were denied.  When we woke up on 9/12, four of our people were dead, Obama did a little speech in the Rose Garden, an interview for _60 Minutes_, and then took off to Vegas for a stump speech.  In the weeks that followed, he and his cronies pointed to this video as the reason why it had happened, but there were no protesters on the ground in Benghazi and they had REAL TIME video and communications on the ground to know it.  Meanwhile back at the ranch, we've got John McCain telling us that on the anniversary of *9/11*, we didn't even have our assets in the region at Alert status... and he's on all the right committees to know:
McCain accuses Pentagon of being unprepared to respond to Libya attack | Fox News

Now, you fuckers can whine and cry all you want about how unfair it is that all this shit is coming out right before an election, but bear in mind that if Barack Obama wasn't INCOMPETENT at his job, you wouldn't be scratching your heads right now trying to think up some excuse for him.  If he'd have done the right thing at any step along the line, you'd have something to work with... but, no.  He fucked it up from beginning to end.


----------



## GuyPinestra (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > mamooth said:
> ...



Actually, after each sentence I was seeing a large boot to your partisan ass.

I thought it was HILARIOUS!!


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

konradv said:


> That just sounds like you're bashing the military for not being prefect.  Obama wasn't flying those jets.  That being said, I think Americans are more concerned about Romney lying about Jeeps-to-China.  He can kiss MI and Oh good-bye.



I'm bashing Obama for lying to the America people. For 14 days, the administration engaged in a calculated and deliberate campaign of disinformation regarding the Benghazi attacks. Some, such as Shallow and Boo, will STILL attempt to use the YouTube video lie, trying for the "big lie" effect.

The fact is that Obama had based much of his reelection campaign on the idea that he had "defeated Al Qaeda and created a peaceful middle east." An Al Qaeda attack on 9/11, which is what this was, didn't fit with his narrative, so he lied, as did his staff, over and over. Further, when Romney called it for what it was, on day one, Obama further compounded his lies. 

{Gov. Romney seems to have a tendency to shoot first and aim later, President Obama said in a CBS interview last night, criticizing Romneys reaction to the embassy attack in Cairo. Romney criticized the Obama administrations apology in response to the attacks on the embassy and subsequent failure to condemn the attacks right away.}

Obama echoes Carter with

Obama is a scumbag. And these emails demonstrate a callous disregard for American lives.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> You know if you read this and imagine a rim shot after each sentence, it's actually kind of funny. Come to think of it, that's how I'll read this shill's posts from now on.



So that would be "no?" You have no cites of embassy attacks under Dubya? You're just a lying hack Obamabot?

Yeah, we knew that.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

geauxtohell said:


> We have people making statements on tactical effects of a weapon platform based on their experiences with them via video games.
> 
> 'Nuff said.



Obama Akbar indeed.


----------



## geauxtohell (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > We have people making statements on tactical effects of a weapon platform based on their experiences with them via video games.
> ...



I enjoyed that.  Especially when the 105 round exploded under the landing Chinook.  So lifelike with the laser guided shrapnel and all...................


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

geauxtohell said:


> I enjoyed that.  Especially when the 105 round exploded under the landing Chinook.  So lifelike with the laser guided shrapnel and all...................



It was just an example, sparky.


----------



## geauxtohell (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > I enjoyed that.  Especially when the 105 round exploded under the landing Chinook.  So lifelike with the laser guided shrapnel and all...................
> ...



Example of what?  A video game that you think somehow approximates real life?  

You see, this is the problem right here....


----------



## Bigfoot (Oct 30, 2012)

A C130 is a fixed wing craft.


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > You even read the shit you post.
> ...



You basically got owned..and can't admit it.

That's fine.

Reagan's attempt to seem "manly" blew up in his face.

The bombing happened before any conclusive evidence of Libyan involvement..and the book is still not entirely not closed on it.

After Lockerbie (not Lockerbei), Reagan didn't do squat.

George W. Bush..however, hungry for Libyan oil and wanting a political victory got the Libyans to "give up" their "nucular" ambitions and pay blood money to Lockerbie families. That was in exchange for normalizing relations.

Fancy that..normalizing relations with a bonafide terrorist.

Good show.

And zero intergrity? Your "integrity" went out the window when you defended Ted Nugent, Hack.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 30, 2012)

Freemason9 said:


> It's also possible that a nation can't just send attack helicopters into other sovereign nations whenever they feel like it. Funny how the right wing hasn't figured that out yet. For some reason, they seem to think that is an OK thing to do.



*Who talked about helicopters. The C-130 Spectres are equipt to fly into situations of that sort.  Do you think they were shot at during the Nam war? And as far as flying over a sovereign country, especially when that country is charged with the safety of those diplomats. Why would those on the ground in Ben Ghazi be asking for the where the Spectres were? Hmm? Did Gen. Ham dispatch the gunship that was recalled by Panetta? Is this the reason for General Ham being relieved of duty?*


----------



## BlindBoo (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> BlindBoo said:
> 
> 
> > The only reason Faux tried this false story is to try and Swift-boat the President.  Most normal people are aware of this tactic.  Looks like it didn't work.  Not even close.  The poll numbers on foriegn policy seem to be increasing for the President.
> ...



No no , specifically it's when* you *say that they lie or are incompetent that I don't give a fuck about.


----------



## Conservative (Oct 30, 2012)

Freemason9 said:


> It's also possible that a nation can't just send attack helicopters into other sovereign nations whenever they feel like it. Funny how the right wing hasn't figured that out yet. For some reason, they seem to think that is an OK thing to do.



Should Reagan have asked permission to go into Greneda and rescue those students, and waited until he got it?


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 30, 2012)

_"Rogue"U.S. General Arrested for Activating Special Forces Teams; Ignoring Libya Stand-Down Order​_

*»
2012-10-29 
PinkTeaPatriot 




The official story surrounding the events of September 11, 2012 in Bengzahi, Libya which left four Americans dead, has now officially fallen apart.

After numerous flips and flops by the Obama administration, which originally attempted to paint the incident as a Muslim outcry over an anti-Islamic video, whistle blowers throughout the U.S. government, including within the White House, the State Department, national intelligence agencies and the U.S.military have made available stunning details that suggest not only did operational commanders have live visual and audio communications from drones overhead and intelligence assets on the ground, but that some commanders within the military were prepared to go-it-alone after being told to "stand down."

Africom commanding officer U.S. General Carter Ham, after being ordered to essentially surrender control of the situation to alleged Al Queda terrorists and let Americans on the ground die, made the unilateral decision to ignore orders from the Secretary of Defense and activated special operations teams at his disposal for immediate deployment to the area.

According to reports, once the General went rogue he was arrested within minutes by his second in command and relieved of duty.


"(The) basic principle is that you don't deploy forces into harm's way without knowing what's going on; without having some real-time information about what's taking place," Panetta told Pentagon reporters. "And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation."

The information I heard today was that General Ham as head of Africom received the same e-mails the White House received requesting help/support as the attack was taking place. General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready.
*

http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2...-ignoring-libya-stand-down-order-2466104.html


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

Sallow said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> ...



Deflection noted.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

Sallow said:


> You basically got owned..and can't admit it.



Are you on drugs?



> That's fine.
> 
> Reagan's attempt to seem "manly" blew up in his face.



The bombing attack in 1986 was in response to a terrorist attack. Lockerbie was in 1988, December 1988. 

How exactly is that "blowing up in his face?"



> The bombing happened before any conclusive evidence of Libyan involvement..and the book is still not entirely not closed on it.
> 
> After Lockerbie (not Lockerbei), Reagan didn't do squat.



ROFL

After Lockerbie, Reagan was out of office.  It happened when Reagan had 2 weeks left in his term.

Like Shalllow, I was alive and remember it. Unlike Shallow, I don't lie about it. George H.W. Bush was President for Lockerbie, despite the lies that you leftist-regressives float.



> George W. Bush..however, hungry for Libyan oil and wanting a political victory got the Libyans to "give up" their "nucular" ambitions and pay blood money to Lockerbie families. That was in exchange for normalizing relations.



It's also what the democratic legislature, both houses, demanded.



> Fancy that..normalizing relations with a bonafide terrorist.
> 
> Good show.



I'm not going to defend Bush, I thought he was a fuckup at the time, and still do. I left the Republican party over Bush. 

He let the leftists push him to appeasement - and YOU are the thanks he gets for it. Like Obama climbing into bed with Al Qaeda in Libya, Bush deserved to get betrayed by the leftists, he was stupid to appease them.



> And zero intergrity? Your "integrity" went out the window when you defended Ted Nugent, Hack.



Seriously? I'll put Nugent up against fucktards like Kanye West or Jason Biggs.


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

mamooth said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> > If it were Barrack Obama (R)....  you'd be shitting yourselves over this and it would be on the 24/7 news cycle.
> ...



Because Bush didn't try to cover it up and lie about it.


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

R.D. said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > Well it seems we're at an empasse here. I don't think there's enough information available to make an intelligent evaluation of the situation nor do I see a reason to attack the President over this. You people are jumping up and down in outrage on the latest right wing anti-Obama trend that'll be replaced in a few weeks by some new outrage.
> ...



Exactly.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> No no , specifically it's when* you *say that they lie or are incompetent that I don't give a fuck about.



Obama did lie, that can't be covered up. And you don't care, except that it hurt his poll numbers. Keeping your party in power is the only issue for you.


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

Freemason9 said:


> It's also possible that a nation can't just send attack helicopters into other sovereign nations whenever they feel like it. Funny how the right wing hasn't figured that out yet. For some reason, they seem to think that is an OK thing to do.



Ok, let's give you that.

Why did obama lie about the attacks?


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > That just sounds like you're bashing the military for not being prefect.  Obama wasn't flying those jets.  That being said, I think Americans are more concerned about Romney lying about Jeeps-to-China.  He can kiss MI and Oh good-bye.
> ...



This.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

Conservative said:


> Should Reagan have asked permission to go into Greneda and rescue those students, and waited until he got it?



Grenada was the start of the fall of the USSR. Many, like Boo, get very angry over Grenada; Reagan destroyed the dream. While small, it was the first time in history that a Communist conquest had been reversed. Sure, Nicaragua and Afghanistan were what toppled the Soviet Empire, but Grenada was the keystone that started it all. It dispelled the idea that the Soviets were invincible, "unbeatable" as Carter had claimed.


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > You basically got owned..and can't admit it.
> ...



You put up a post about Reagan's reaction to terrorism after I had one about Obama's and Lockerbie.

Now..after I pointed it out..you realize that Reagan's bombings had nothing to do with Lockerbie at all.

Believe you me..this is amusing.



Another backflip jim.


----------



## konradv (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> BlindBoo said:
> 
> 
> > No no , specifically it's when* you *say that they lie or are incompetent that I don't give a fuck about.
> ...



I think Americans are more concerned about Mitt lying about jobs.  Benghazi may make good talking points, but in the end, it's the economy, stupid.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

Sallow said:


> You put up a post about Reagan's reaction to terrorism after I had one about Obama's and Lockerbie.



Dude, you claimed that REAGAN, not BUSH, but Reagan, did nothing to respond to terrorism. "Cut and Run," was your claim, right?

So I corrected your lie.



> Now..after I pointed it out..you realize that Reagan's bombings had nothing to do with Lockerbie at all.



Really?

Cool, so you'll retract the claim that Lockerbie was a response? "Blew up in his face" I believe was the bullshit you floated?



> Believe you me..this is amusing.



Oh, I agree.



> Another backflip jim.



Because Reagan didn't respond to Lockerbie?

ROFL...


----------



## Againsheila (Oct 30, 2012)

konradv said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...



I don't give a crap about Romney.  I do care that our country FAILED our people in Libya and people DIED.  Your defense of Obama is turning you into an unthinking robot that cares nothing for our country or our people.

This had NOTHING to do with Romney, it has NOTHING to do with the election except for the fact that it proves Obama is unfit to lead our country and cares nothing for our own people in foreign lands.  After all I've read, as far as I'm concerned, Obama could have just killed those people themselves and it would have been better because then at least their bodies wouldn't have been violated.

The media cover up of this is nothing new, our media has been covering up for both parties since Reagan.


----------



## Caroljo (Oct 30, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> Vel said:
> 
> 
> > BlindBoo said:
> ...



Yup....you still couldn't answer that question i see.  This is why you love Obama so much, you're just like him.

He won't answer any straight forward questions either.....nice job!


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 30, 2012)

PredFan said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



*So accordingly, the death of Ambassador Stevens and three employees of the United States of America are inconsequential because they interfere with with the political re-election aspirations of Barack Hussein Obama.*


----------



## PredFan (Oct 30, 2012)

This needs to be posted again, because it's the truth and the left has been straffing this thread with lies, eflections, and derailing attempts.

1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.

2.  It demonstrates the unconscionable elevation of politics over protection of American citizens.

3.  It demonstrates pervasive corruption/coverup  throughout the Executive Branch of our government.

4.  It demonstrates the pervasive corruption of journalism in our mainstream media.

5.  It demonstrates the corruption of political partisans who support their candidate no matter what harm is done to their country.


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2012)

PredFan said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> > Soggy in NOLA said:
> ...





Exactly.

I don't remember Bush's UN Ambassador running around all all the Sunday talk shows lying his ass off that it was a "spontaneous" attack caused by an anti Islam video.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

konradv said:


> I think Americans are more concerned about Mitt lying about jobs.  Benghazi may make good talking points, but in the end, it's the economy, stupid.



I doubt it, but you can pray.

Oh, and Mitt in no way lied.

I corrected you earlier, but you care about party, not fact.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)




----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


>



Great cartoon!


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

jwoodie said:


> 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> 
> 2.  It demonstrates the unconscionable elevation of politics over protection of American citizens.
> 
> ...



It demonstrates right wing desperation.  That is the net result.


----------



## Si modo (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> ...


It demonstrates that, even after four years of much-needed on-the-job training, the POTUS STILL can't do the job.

And, Americans *still* die because of his incompetence.


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> ...



Desperation? To want answers and not lies? To want to know why the Ambassador and the Consulate's only security were two Libyan militias?

To want to know why this Administration allowed the Consulate to be under attack for 7 hours and not attempt a rescue?

To want to know why the Administration in effect left these men to die?

Really?


----------



## Freemason9 (Oct 30, 2012)

PredFan said:


> Freemason9 said:
> 
> 
> > It's also possible that a nation can't just send attack helicopters into other sovereign nations whenever they feel like it. Funny how the right wing hasn't figured that out yet. For some reason, they seem to think that is an OK thing to do.
> ...



Why? Because he's a politician.

Next question . . .


----------



## Claudette (Oct 30, 2012)

The Barry worshipers don't want to know those answers. 

They prefer to say that anyone who disagrees with Barry and his administratioins tale is a hater, a racist or a nut. 

Just goes to show what blind idiots they are.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 30, 2012)

GuyPinestra said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > Well it seems we're at an empasse here. I don't think there's enough information available to make an intelligent evaluation of the situation nor do I see a reason to attack the President over this. You people are jumping up and down in outrage on the latest right wing anti-Obama trend that'll be replaced in a few weeks by some new outrage.
> ...



*Well at least Pres. Carter tried to save those Embassy employees kidnapped by the Iranians, even though the attempt was disastrous. In this case Obama just left the people to die. It took the deaths of four, the wounding of others and sheer heroism of the survivors to escape with no help from Obama or his cronies, thank you.
The claim has been made that there's not enough evidence to place culpablity on the President. Why then is he denying, deflecting and lying about the issue? Why hasn't he opened the whole thing and be honest. Why was Gen. Carter Ham fired on the spot?*


----------



## Freemason9 (Oct 30, 2012)

If Obama is guilty of a crime for failing to act to prevent the deaths of four Americans--given the lead time of a couple of hours--

Is George W. Bush guilty for the deaths of 3,000 Americans, given a lead time of many months?

And, if so, why isn't this right wing bunch of zealots raising holy hell about THAT?


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2012)

Freemason9 said:


> If Obama is guilty of a crime for failing to act to prevent the deaths of four Americans--given the lead time of a couple of hours--
> 
> Is George W. Bush guilty for the deaths of 3,000 Americans, given a lead time of many months?
> 
> And, if so, why isn't this right wing bunch of zealots raising holy hell about THAT?



Oh we have over the years. Many of us have trying to piece together the lead up to 9/11.

Herein lies the difference.

None of you left wing zealots want to ask one question about Obama's fuck ups.

You're just Obamabots protecting your Messiah. Pathetic pukes you are. And all you can ever do is go "Booooooooooooooooooooosh" or "Ronnnnnnnnnnnie Reagan".

You can never seriously debate.


----------



## Againsheila (Oct 30, 2012)

Freemason9 said:


> If Obama is guilty of a crime for failing to act to prevent the deaths of four Americans--given the lead time of a couple of hours--
> 
> Is George W. Bush guilty for the deaths of 3,000 Americans, given a lead time of many months?
> 
> And, if so, why isn't this right wing bunch of zealots raising holy hell about THAT?



I think you'll have to be more specific on that "lead time" for the 3,000.  If you are talking about  9/11, where's your proof that there were several months "lead time"?  

I don't even know how you can compare the two.  Well, if Bush had told the fire department and the police department not to respond when the WTC was hit by the first plane, you might have a point...otherwise it's just garbage.


----------



## Freemason9 (Oct 30, 2012)

Againsheila said:


> Freemason9 said:
> 
> 
> > If Obama is guilty of a crime for failing to act to prevent the deaths of four Americans--given the lead time of a couple of hours--
> ...



For fuck's sake, are you really that stupid?


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 30, 2012)

_The Benghazi Coverup: Are Reporters Embarrassed?​_


*John Hinderaker 
October 30, 2012  



The media formerly known as mainstream have largely failed to cover the Benghazi scandal. For the most part, they havent covered the most explosive aspects of the scandalthose most threatening to Obamas re-election hopesat all. If they had any pride, this devastating Michael Ramirez cartoon would shame them:







Read more:
The Benghazi Coverup: Are Reporters Embarrassed? | Power Line*


----------



## Againsheila (Oct 30, 2012)

Freemason9 said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Freemason9 said:
> ...



I'll compare my IQ to yours anytime....


----------



## Freemason9 (Oct 30, 2012)

Againsheila said:


> Freemason9 said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



You should not do that.


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2012)

Againsheila said:


> Freemason9 said:
> 
> 
> > If Obama is guilty of a crime for failing to act to prevent the deaths of four Americans--given the lead time of a couple of hours--
> ...



And I do believe many of us, without being crazy 9/11 truthers wanted answers. Demanded answers.

And we got as much as we could hope for considering the absolutely insane plot. And truly that's what it was. Who would ever believe crazy Islamists were going to go kamikaze into the WTC towers?

What was Bush to do?

Ground all air traffic?

Liberals on the other hand don't want to know the truth about Benghazi and appear to be perfectly fine with the "video spontaneous attack" lie. 

We had to learn the truth that this was an organized attack from the freaking Libyan President for crying out loud.


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > You put up a post about Reagan's reaction to terrorism after I had one about Obama's and Lockerbie.
> ...





Reagan was pretty weak when it came to terrorism.

Which..kind of makes sense..since he was creating many future ones. Like his funding of Osama Bin Laden and his band of happy muj warriors. Or making secret deals with the Iranians that took American hostages. Or helping the nun raping Contras.

But all one has to do is look at his response to the bombing which killed 250 marines.

Yessiree bob..you are some stable ground..


----------



## Freemason9 (Oct 30, 2012)

This is nothing but stupid partisan trash. If a Republican were president under identical circumstances, I guarantee you their arguments would be exactly reversed.

This is why America is retarded.


----------



## Againsheila (Oct 30, 2012)

Freemason9 said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Freemason9 said:
> ...



I understand your fear.


----------



## Dante (Oct 30, 2012)

*Why Benghazi Doesn't Matter To Most Americans*

Most Americans are worried about jobs and the economy which are improving. Most Americans do not watch FOX News or hang out on the world wide web looking for issues to attack the President on in order to make Romney look good.

Most Americans know no crime was committed by any Americans here. The President did not attack the US Consulate in Libya. 

So why do people who watch FOX News and hang out on the world wide web look for issues to attack the President on in order to make Romney look good, even if it means breaking the compact we have on sticking together when attacked by enemies of America? I don't think these people are evil. I think they're misguided and locked in a bubble where a Noise Machine in the Echo chamber of their world has them programmed to stay paranoid, alarmed, and angry.

It's not 1984 in America -- It's A Brave New World


dD


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

Freemason9 said:


> If Obama is guilty of a crime for failing to act to prevent the deaths of four Americans--given the lead time of a couple of hours--
> 
> Is George W. Bush guilty for the deaths of 3,000 Americans, given a lead time of many months?
> 
> And, if so, why isn't this right wing bunch of zealots raising holy hell about THAT?



See, no one said Obama is guilty of a crime. 

What we said is that Obama engaged is a concerted campaign of lies and disinformation, AFTER the attacks, to hide the nature of the attacks and the response (or lack therein) by the Administration.

Obama bragged that he "Killed bin Laden, and Al Qaeda is on their heels." 

Well, Al Qaeda launched an offensive on 9/11 across 19 countries. Kudos to the administration that in 18 of those, the attacks went nowhere.

HOWEVER, in Libya, the attacks resulted in 4 deaths. Now even that can be written off as a tragic event, EXCEPT that the administration chose to lie about it, for political gain.  For 14 days this administration directly and callously lied to America.


----------



## RoadVirus (Oct 30, 2012)

Americans don't care that 4 people needlessly died in a terrorist attack? I seriously doubt that.


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

tinydancer said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Freemason9 said:
> ...



Short list?

-Institute the changes that Al Gore wanted to Air Port security. You know, the ones Republicans shot down as to expensive.

-Take Clinton's advice and focus on terrorists, instead of the Chinese and Russians.

-Increase funding for CIA. Recruit Arab Language speakers to infilitrate terrorist cells abroad.

-Pay attention to the news. Osama Bin Laden, during a CNN interview declared war on the US.

-Pay attention to his own Presidential briefs. You know, the ones that said Al Qaeda was determined to attack America?

He did none of that.


----------



## Freemason9 (Oct 30, 2012)

Hell, let's impeach every American politician. They're all scoundrels.


----------



## asaratis (Oct 30, 2012)

Dante said:


> *Why Benghazi Doesn't Matter To Most Americans*
> 
> Most Americans are worried about jobs and the economy which are improving. Most Americans do not watch FOX News or hang out on the world wide web looking for issues to attack the President on in order to make Romney look good.
> 
> ...


Benghazi illustrates the fact that Obama should never have been elected our President.

We don't have  to look for issues upon which to attack Obama.  He creates them every fuckin' day with his lies.  He is a boy in a man's job and he just can't cut it!

FUCK Obama and all of his supporters!


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

tinydancer said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Freemason9 said:
> ...



What lie?

Initial intel had a demonstration and attack sparked from the video.

And..to this day..the video hasn't been ruled out.

It was republicans that cut funding for embassy security.

And, in any case, embassies are not military bases or fortresses.


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

Freemason9 said:


> Hell, let's impeach every American politician. They're all scoundrels.



How many Republican Presidents have been impeached?


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2012)

Sallow said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > Sallow said:
> ...



Aren't you interested at all in what really happened in Benghazi? Why does it always have to be  "Boooooooooooooosh" and "Reagan" screwed up too?

Lame.

Oh and by the way regarding the Mujahideen, Carter armed them first. I'm sick to death of this crap of blaming only Reagan. 

Because it's bullshit. Reagan just carried on Carter's policy. 

* Years later, in a 1997 CNN/National Security Archive interview, Brzezinski detailed the strategy taken by the Carter administration against the Soviets in 1979:

    We immediately launched a twofold process when we heard that the Soviets had entered Afghanistan. 

The first involved direct reactions and sanctions focused on the Soviet Union, and both the State Department and the National Security Council prepared long lists of sanctions to be adopted, of steps to be taken to increase the international costs to the Soviet Union of their actions.

 And the second course of action led to my going to Pakistan a month or so after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, for the purpose of coordinating with the Pakistanis a joint response, the purpose of which would be to make the Soviets bleed for as much and as long as is possible; and we engaged in that effort in a collaborative sense with the Saudis, the Egyptians, the British, the Chinese, and we started providing weapons to the Mujaheddin, from various sources again  for example, some Soviet arms from the Egyptians and the Chinese. 

We even got Soviet arms from the Czechoslovak communist government, since it was obviously susceptible to material incentives; and at some point we started buying arms for the Mujaheddin from the Soviet army in Afghanistan, because that army was increasingly corrupt*

Mujahideen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Againsheila (Oct 30, 2012)

Freemason9 said:


> Hell, let's impeach every American politician. They're all scoundrels.



I'll go for that


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

tinydancer said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > Uncensored2008 said:
> ...



Yep..true about Carter.

But the mission changed with Reagan..it went from "harrass" to "victory".

But maybe you didn't know that.


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

Againsheila said:


> Freemason9 said:
> 
> 
> > Hell, let's impeach every American politician. They're all scoundrels.
> ...



Of course you would.

Because no Republican President has ever been impeached.


----------



## Againsheila (Oct 30, 2012)

Sallow said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Freemason9 said:
> ...



Nixon resigned rather than face impeachment.

BTW, I'm a moderate and I will not be voting for Romney OR Obama.  The dems and the reps have done more damage to this country than any other two groups in history and that includes the English during the revolutionary war.


----------



## asaratis (Oct 30, 2012)

All you silly people that deflect the argument away from Obama's ineptness and try to focus on some allegedly similar failure of another politician from the past...you make me sick!  You can't defend what that WORM did in the Benghazi terror attack so you bring out things that make you think badly of other people.

Obama is totally UNFIT to be our President!  He should do us all a favor and step down!


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

Sallow said:


> Short list?
> 
> -Institute the changes that Al Gore wanted to Air Port security. You know, the ones Republicans shot down as to expensive.



You're so full of shit.

{The report advanced 20 serious recommendations to strengthen aviation security. The proposals called for a 60-day test for matching bags with passengers on domestic flights and a computer-based system of profiling passengers.

Also proposed were vulnerability assessments at every commercial airport in the country, increased numbers of bomb-sniffing dogs, better screening and training of the workers who examined bags, and more frequent tests of their work.

At a press conference on Sept. 9, Vice President Gore declared his strong support for these proposals. But this support did not last for long.

Within 10 days, the whole [airline] industry jumped all over Al Gore, commissioner Victoria Cummock, a citizen activist whose husband was killed on Pan Am 103, would later claim.

As the Boston Globe would report five years later, this pressure took the form of an intense lobbying campaign aimed at the White House.

On Sept. 19, Gore backed off the proposal in a letter to Carol Hallett, president of the industrys trade group, the Air Transport Association.

Wrote Gore, I want to make it very clear that it is not the intent of this administration or of the commission to create a hardship for the air transportation industry or to cause inconvenience to the traveling public.}

How Al Gore subverted his own aviation commission

Hey, you're a democrat; you lie.



> -Take Clinton's advice and focus on terrorists, instead of the Chinese and Russians.



BWAHAHAHAHA

Now this is just funny - I mean, you lie about everything, but Dubya was focused on the Ruskies, huh?

Oh, that Clinton "advice," "Bin Laden determined to attack."

Well fuck, THAT is some actionable intel. Who couldn't look at that and know that aircraft would be hijacked on 9/11 and used for kamakazie attacks?

Seriously, you're a fucking clown, a partisan buffoon.



> -Increase funding for CIA. Recruit Arab Language speakers to infilitrate terrorist cells abroad.



{ "I think America  America never made up for the Clinton peace dividend; America never made up for the gutting of the intelligence services that Bill Clinton did," Giuliani said Nov. 2, 2007, on Bloomberg TV's Political Capital With Al Hunt. "I think those are Tenet's words, by the way, that Bill Clinton gutted American intelligence  20, 30 percent cuts," Giuliani said, referring to former CIA director George Tenet, who has taken much of the heat for not foreseeing the 9/11 attacks.

Given that his fellow front-runner, Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York, was first lady during that time, Giuliani is eager to paint the most unflattering portrait he can of the Clinton administration's antiterrorism record.

It is true that Clinton oversaw decreases in the intelligence budget and that Tenet has described the budget situation when he became CIA director in 1997, four years into Clinton's presidency, as a disaster. But Tenet has never placed blame on Clinton in the way Giuliani describes (which makes sense since Clinton made him director). }

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...udy-giuliani/hes-on-point-but-still-off-base/

Lie much?



> -Pay attention to the news. Osama Bin Laden, during a CNN interview declared war on the US.



In 1994...

So it would be Clinton who should have paid attention.



> -Pay attention to his own Presidential briefs. You know, the ones that said Al Qaeda was determined to attack America?
> 
> He did none of that.



Such actionable intel.

"Bin Laden determined to attack." Fucking a, that's all we needed to stop the attack.


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 30, 2012)

daveman said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Prove to me that he actually gave the order not to engage the enemy. We both don't know what happened, all you are working off of is a combination of 'leaks' and conjecture by conservative talking heads who are doing this solely as a way to attack him. They should be ashamed of themselves to try to use this incident and tragedy as a political football. 
You don't know if that General was relieved from duty because he didn't act any more than it was because he wanted to act and didn't follow orders from his chain of command. The President was friends with the Ambassador, I think that the incident needs to be investigated by a bi-partisan panel. I think and know that someone DID drop the ball on this one.
If you people want to give the President all of the 'credit' for this incident, it's pretty hypocritical of you to not want to give him the 'credit' and distance him away from getting OBL.


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 30, 2012)

Si modo said:


> Obama's incompetence continues to kill Americans.  He is a dangerous buffoon.  Without having to worry about reelection, can anyone even imagine the disaster he would be in a second term?



A LOT LESS than the guy you most likely voted for two terms in a row and the Iraq debacle where thousands were killed because of some bogus war built on errors and misinformation and a STUPID nation-building experiment. You guys have some nerve!


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

Pheonixops said:


> A LOT LESS than the guy you most likely voted for two terms in a row and the Iraq debacle where thousands were killed because of some bogus war built on errors and misinformation and a STUPID nation-building experiment. You guys have some nerve!



Well, there you go.

We should ignore Obama lying to the American people because BOOOOOSSHHHH.

It's kind of a "catch all" for you leftist-regressives. Anything can be covered up with a good BOOOOOSSHHHH.

Hey, if that doesn't work, you can call us racist!


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Wehrwolfen said:
> 
> 
> > *It's obvious that the Ambassador and the three men assassinated on September 11, 2012 mean very little to you and especially the fact that they were abandoned and refused aid three times by your dear leader. Then there's the fact that General Carter Ham was relieved of duty immediately after refusing to abandon the people in Ben Ghazi*
> ...



I would LOVE to see Gary Johnson get elected and the Libertarians gain more seats in Congress. I just think that you 2016 and World Nut Daily folks are pretty fucked up individuals who want to obtain and retain power. I listened to the two scumbags hannity and limbaugh today, they expose your 'principles' quite clearly. The fat fuck limbaugh tried to make an issue of Obama suspending his campaigning today, had Obama campaigned today, the fat fuck and his minions like you would have complained about. Take those 'right wing principles' and shove them. Signing the PA was sure looking out for our Civil Liberties. The PA was enacted by republicans, Obama is no better than you guys because he extended it and signed the NDAA. He has the neocon policies as you guys but you knock him for that. 
Where were the WMD's that you Administration claimed were in Iraq? Thanks for the laugh.


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2012)

Sallow said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



This compound didn't even have the basics. 

And are you going to try to tell me that Marines couldn't have been transferred to Libya from Embassies in Britain, Belgium, Ireland or Canada for example?

That no one in this administration thought that the Embassy in Brussels was secure and maybe Ambassador Stevens needed Marines more in Libya?

And that all this pathetic administration could come up with were two Libyan Militias to guard the Consulate?

Are you serious?


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > You know, we had ICBMs too.  How come the administration didn't use the?
> ...



They are a bunch of loons, one even used a video game to show the capabilities of a gunship! This is the fantasy land these dolts live in!!!


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 30, 2012)

geauxtohell said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That was a prime example of the Hannitard armchair generals!


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 30, 2012)

geauxtohell said:


> We have people making statements on tactical effects of a weapon platform based on their experiences with them via video games.
> 
> 'Nuff said.



That's their "right wing principles"!


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > A LOT LESS than the guy you most likely voted for two terms in a row and the Iraq debacle where thousands were killed because of some bogus war built on errors and misinformation and a STUPID nation-building experiment. You guys have some nerve!
> ...



Actually it's "Well, there *YOU* go." , where did I state that "We should ignore Obama lying to the American people because BOOOOOSSHHHH."? That's your DISHONEST pretext, I stated a fact.

Actually I was just pointing out the possibility of your hypocrisy.

I don't have to call you guys 'racists', some of your comrades make the case for themselves all too well.


----------



## g5000 (Oct 30, 2012)

All right.  Here is what really happened in Benghazi.  I have this from a reliable source in the comments section of a right wing oriented blog I read.

Ambassador Christopher Stevens and President Barack Obama were in a homosexual love triangle with Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.  Stevens blamed Obama for Terry's death and was "going to blow the lid off" the Fast & Furious scandal.  His inside information was going to bring down the whole Obama Administration, and possibly result in Obama serving some hard time.

Obama's homosexuality explains why he sends Michelle on so many taxpayer-paid vacations and why he spends so much time on the golf course to get away from her.  Tales of "big gay orgies" in the country club locker room have been making the rounds of the Secret Service for years.

Obama decided the best way to solve his problems was to send Stevens to the most dangerous place in the world with the hopes his Muslim brothers would "do the right thing" and kill Stevens for him.

But the Muslims "had bigger fish to fry" what with trying to take over the entire Middle East through revolution in Syria and Egypt and Libya.

Obama became frustrated with their slowness to do his ex-lover in.  The situation became completely untenable for him when, as an inside joke about Libya's Qaddafi, Stevens began daily threatening "the mother of all October Surprises" which would hand Romney an "election bombshell" on a silver platter.

Stevens knew he was "a big, fat target" and kept requesting protection through back channels, but Obama was well wired into the back channels since he had been personally overseeing drone attacks "since Day One" of his Administration and the military was loyal to him.  And over at the State Department, the "dyke of diplomacy", Hillary Clinton, had her own beef with Stevens for threatening to drag her down with Obama by exposing her love affair with Condi Rice.  So she also cock-blocked all protection requests by Stevens.

As October drew closer and closer, Obama decided to take matters into his own hands, using his fellow Muslims as cover for his own personal assassination plot.

As one person in the White House situation room admitted, Obama said, "That bastard has been on my kill list for too long.  If you want something done right, you have to do it yourself."

Obama then personally commandeered the Predator drone flying over the consulate and shot a Hellfire missile into the consulate wall, creating a hole for the "terrorists" to enter the compound and take out Stevens.  To add insult to injury, Obama had the "terrorists" gang rape Stevens' body.

To cover his tracks further, in subsequent days Obama alternated between the fictions of an anti-Muslim video and a terrorist attack to sow confusion in the public discourse over the matter.  

He was "greatly amused" over the back and forth arguing over whether the killing was because of the video or because it was a terrorist attack.  No one ever suspected it was something else entirely.

This will all be coming out in Judge Neopolitano's tell-all book _Wake The Fuck Up, Sheep!_


.


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 30, 2012)

We are going to hear this on the Savage Nation, as well as hannity, limbaugh tomorrow afternoon! If it was published in a blog, I'm sure that a few of these blowhard lemming would run with it.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

tinydancer said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



Yes really. 

You guys are so eager to smear our President because Romney is such a poor candidate that this is the flavor of the month.  You'll be on to something else next month.  

It will be good news too ; you look like idiots this month.


----------



## g5000 (Oct 30, 2012)

Why will President Obama not disclose everything about his love triangle with Stevens and Terry?

Why won't the Secret Service address questions about the country club gay orgies?

Why hasn't Michelle spoken about her real reasons for going on so many vacations?

Why is Condi Rice hiding?


This sure does make Obama look even more suspicious.

.


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Just shows what an Obamabot you are. How callous. How very liberal of you. Four men are dead.

Obama and his Administration lied for days on end blaming a video.

It took the Libyan President to tell us the truth. That's a sad commentary on the political divide in America. 

Truly sad.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 30, 2012)

*Benghazigate: Obamas Bad Intel Excuse is Falling Apart​*


*FrontPageMag.Com 
October 29, 2012
By: Daniel Greenfield 



The current excuse is that Obama wasnt lying when he and his cronies kept blaming a video, he was the victim of bad intel from the bad intelligence community. Oddly though Senators with less intel access, like McCain, drew the right conclusions and so did most serious commentators on the region.

And the intelligence community stated that it was a terrorist attack by Al Qaeda, not a protest\murderous movie review.

Two days after the deadly Libya terror attack, representatives of the FBI and National Counterterrorism Center gave Capitol Hill briefings in which they said the evidence supported an Al Qaeda or Al Qaeda-affiliated attack, Fox News has learned.

The description of the attack by those in the Sept. 13 briefings stands in stark contrast to the now controversial briefing on Capitol Hill by CIA Director David Petraeus the following day  and raises even more questions about why Petraeus described the attack as tied to a demonstration.

The Sept. 13 assessment was based on intercepts that included individuals, believed to have participated in the attack, who were celebratory  as well as a claim of responsibility.

FBI and NCTC also briefed that there were a series of Al Qaeda training camps just outside of Benghazi, where the attack occurred and resulted in the deaths of four Americans. The area was described as a hotbed for the militant Ansar al-Sharia as well as Al Qaeda in North Africa.

The intelligence community did not mislead Obama by providing bad intel, as the FOX News story documents it was the Obama Administration that appeared to have pressured top officials like Petraeus into adopting a different narrative.

It takes no great intelligence to know that a large scale assault conducted with heavy weapons is not a spontaneous event. But the Administration wanted to present a picture of offended Muslims to hide the truth that Al Qaeda was on the rampage and that Obamas policies had made the rampage possible.*


----------



## OODA_Loop (Oct 30, 2012)

Just waiting on the _investigation._

Any day now.


----------



## freedombecki (Oct 30, 2012)

konradv said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> ...


It didn't bother the Obama Administration to use the Ambassador's death for political gain by covering it up with smarm if not total hubris about how it was all our fault for insulting the Muslim world..


----------



## Si modo (Oct 30, 2012)

Obama lied, Americans died.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Oct 30, 2012)

There is no excuse the American public will accept for purposefully withholding aid to Americans in harms way.

Truth will rise to the surface.   The American military will not lie to cover Obama.


----------



## freedombecki (Oct 30, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> *Benghazigate: Obama&#8217;s &#8220;Bad Intel&#8221; Excuse is Falling Apart​*
> 
> *FrontPageMag.Com
> October 29, 2012
> ...



Why is it the American people are always the last to know when this Administration starts playing the fiddle and fiddling around?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

Pheonixops said:


> I would LOVE to see Gary Johnson get elected and the Libertarians gain more seats in Congress.



I suspect that you would like to see people vote for Johnson to siphon votes away from Romney.

Oh, and I would MUCH rather see Johnson as president than Romney, but pragmatically acknowledge that Romney is the key to getting the cancer of Obama cut out of America.



> I just think that you 2016 and World Nut Daily folks are pretty fucked up individuals who want to obtain and retain power.



Dinesh D'Souza  put together the only rational treatise on Obama that I've seen. Rejecting the bullshit of the birthers and those claiming Obama is a Muslim, D'Souza provides a well researched and factual look at Obama. That you trash him is just an example of your lack of rational thought.



> I listened to the two scumbags hannity and limbaugh today, they expose your 'principles' quite clearly. The fat fuck limbaugh tried to make an issue of Obama suspending his campaigning today, had Obama campaigned today, the fat fuck and his minions like you would have complained about.



I'm who's minion? Do I get paid?

Or is it that anyone who isn't a faithful Obamabot MUST be a Limbaugh minion?



> Take those 'right wing principles' and shove them. Signing the PA was sure looking out for our Civil Liberties.



So, your little tin god repealed the patriot act, right? I mean, you had your Messiah® and both houses of congress for two years, so your shameful party went all out to repeal the patriot act; yes?



> The PA was enacted by republicans,



By Republicans and their democrat counter-parts.



> Obama is no better than you guys because he extended it and signed the NDAA. He has the neocon policies as you guys but you knock him for that.



ROFL

Sparky, "neo-con" means "domestically conservative, with a leftist global policy." Gee, your little tin god has a leftist global policy? Who woodathunkit?



> Where were the WMD's that you Administration claimed were in Iraq?



I had an administration? Why didn't someone tell me? I would have sold it to finance an expansion on the garage....



> Thanks for the laugh.



Any time!


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

freedombecki said:


> Why is it the American people are always the last to know when this Administration starts playing the fiddle and fiddling around?



Uh, because the press is really just a propaganda apparatus working on behalf of the DNC?

That's my guess, anyway.


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > Short list?
> ...



Seriously..you should stick to stuff you know about..

Um..wait a minute.

You don't know about anything.

Just continue..because it's fun to watch.


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

tinydancer said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...



Could they?

Not an expert on these things.

And not knowing what you know now..where would you put them?

Egypt? That's pretty much more of an important state to us geopolitically then Libya..

How about Yemen? How about any number of Middle Eastern countries in turmoil. How do you choose? And how are you so sure that a greater military presence isn't going to infuriate both the fragile governments and the local population?

Like I said..these are embassies. Despite what you folks may think..they are not suppose to be a projection of US military might.


----------



## copsnrobbers (Oct 30, 2012)

Gun running cover up.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

Sallow said:


> Seriously..you should stick to stuff you know about..



Like you do!

Lying for Obama is something you really know about.




> Um..wait a minute.
> 
> You don't know about anything.
> 
> Just continue..because it's fun to watch.



I knew enough to tear your partisan hackery apart.


----------



## EriktheRed (Oct 30, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> You know if the right-wing could stop crying and actually pick some relevant things to attack the President on instead of all these utterly retarded attacks that just drown each other out, they might actually have a reasonable argument.




What else do they have, though?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 30, 2012)

EriktheRed said:


> What else do they have, though?



Yeah, because 4 dead Americans and 14 days of the president openly lying isn't "relevant."


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > Seriously..you should stick to stuff you know about..
> ...




Naw..you screwed the pooch when you flummoxed the Reagan response to Lockerbie.

Then got deeper into it.

Keep it up.

Fun stuff.


----------



## AquaAthena (Oct 30, 2012)

*4. It demonstrates the pervasive corruption of journalism in our mainstream media.*

 Sadly,modern journalism, by giving us the opinions of the uneducated, keeps us in touch with the ignorance of the community who will believe it's every word.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 30, 2012)

Sallow said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > Sallow said:
> ...



[/I]_Hmm, samething with the Ben Ghazi attack. Intel knows al Qaeda is training in Libya, Obama sent Stevens there to get armaments to send to Syria. He even made a deal with Mursi in Egypt to kidnap Stevens to exchange him for the blind sheik to make him look good before election day. Murphy's Law kicked in and things went FUBAR. Funny how the Left always attempts to lie, deny and deflect the issues of today. At least Carter tried to rsecue the captured Embassy workers, here Oblamer let them die. Didn't Oblamer try to blame the CIA for this? Guess he couldn't blame Bush or could he.?_[/SIZE][/FONT][/B]


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

tinydancer said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...



You dickweeds tried to make the same case out of Fast and Furious--remember?  Now it's hardly mentioned.  

If you're bringing this up again in February, I'll be happy to retract my statement.  What you're trying to do now is smear your President.  It's that simply and your thinly veiled cloak "concern" for four dead Americans whose death you're politicizing will be your cross to bear.


----------



## Sallow (Oct 30, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > Uncensored2008 said:
> ...



You're comparing the situation in Iran to Libya?

Really?


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Vel said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > BluePhantom said:
> ...



You don't seem to know how bullets flying from a vulcan cannon work.  Or the secondary explosions, invading another nation's airspace with a war plane, etc...


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

geauxtohell said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah...life is just like Call of Duty 4.  This is the "jump the shark" moment of a "jump the shark thread".


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Fast and Furious isn't over at all. Not by a long shot. And the Benghazi investigation has just begun.

Here's an update for you on F&F. I'm following it. I haven't forgotten about Brian Terry. Neither has Issa.

Latest Fast and Furious Report Incriminates DOJ

But this thread is about Benghazi and how Americans were left to die with no rescue attempt.


----------



## Serioususername (Oct 30, 2012)

> Standard Disclaimer: Yes, it's from COD4, but well demonstrates how this thing works.



Considering the 25mm on that fires like some sort of pin-point laser gun, as opposed to the wide dispersal of rounds shown in ACTUAL gun camera footage.

Er...you're wrong.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 30, 2012)

_Former Pacific Fleet chief: We need full disclosure on Benghazi  now​_
*October 30, 2012 
by Ed Morrissey

Retired Admiral James A. Lyons likely pulled few punches as commander in chief of the US Pacific Fleet during his career  and he hasnt started pulling punches now, either.  In a blistering column at The Washington Times, the former commander blasts the lack of action from the US when the administration learned our consulate in Benghazi had come under attack, writing that courage was lacking that might have saved at least some of the four American lives lost on September 11.  Someone high up in the administration, Lyons writes, let our people get killed  and he wants some answers immediately as to whom:

The Obama national security team, including CIA, DNI, State Department and the Pentagon, watched and listened to the assault but did nothing to answer repeated calls for assistance. It has been reported that President Obama met with Vice President Joseph R. Biden and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta in the Oval Office, presumably to see what support could be provided. After all, we had very credible military resources within striking distance. At our military base in Sigonella, Sicily, which is slightly over 400 miles from Benghazi, we had a fully equipped Special Forces unit with both transport and jet strike aircraft prepositioned. Certainly this was a force much more capable than the 22-man force from our embassy in Tripoli.

I know those Special Forces personnel were ready to leap at the opportunity. There is no doubt in my mind they would have wiped out the terrorists attackers. Also I have no doubt that Admiral William McRaven, Commander of U.S. Special Operations Command, would have had his local commander at Sigonella ready to launch; however, apparently he was countermandedby whom? We need to know.

I also understand we had a C-130 gunship available, which would have quickly disposed of the terrorist attackers. This attack went on for seven hours. Our fighter jets could have been at our Benghazi mission within an hour. Our Special Forces out of Sigonella could have been there within a few hours. There is not any doubt that action on our part could have saved the lives of our two former Navy SEALs and possibly the ambassador.

Having been in a number of similar situations, I know you have to have the courage to do whats right and take immediate action. Obviously, that courage was lacking for Benghazi. The safety of your personnel always remains paramount. With all the technology and military capability we had in theater, for our leadership to have deliberately ignored the pleas for assistance is not only incomprehensible, it is un-American.

There has been plenty of speculation as to what Ambassador Chris Stevens was doing in Benghazi in the first place, which Lyons touches on in his column.  Even apart from that, though, this argument above is the key to the failure of the American response.  We always come to the aid of our diplomatic missions when under attack, especially with as many assets in the area as we had at the time.  Its worth noting that we intervened militarily in Libya in the first place to prevent a massacre of civilians by Moammar Qaddafi in Benghazi  and now were supposed to believe that we couldnt coordinate a military response to an attack in that same city on our own consulate in seven hours?

Heres another curiosity, too.  General Carter Ham, who commanded AFRICOM on September 11th, had already been rotated back home.  Now we find out hes leaving the Army altogether:


General Carter F. Ham, the Combatant Commander of Africa Command (AFRICOM) and a key figure in the Benghazi-gate controversy, is leaving the Army. On October 18, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta had announced that General Ham would be succeeded at AFRICOM by General David Rodriguez. Later speculation tied this decision to the fallout from the September 11, 2012 attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens. However on Monday October 29 a defense official told The Washington Times that the decision [to leave AFRICOM] was made by General Ham. He ably served the nation for nearly forty years and retires after a distinguished career. Previously all that was known was that General Ham would be rotating out of AFRICOM at some future date, but not that he was leaving the service. General Ham is a few years short of the mandatory retirement age of 64, but it is not unusual for someone of that rank to retire after serving in such a significant command.

James Robbins notes that the White House insisted that Ham took part in the decision not to supply assistance to the consulate, but Ham told Rep. Jason Chaffetz that no one had asked him about it.
[excerpt]

Read more:
Former Pacific Fleet chief: We need full disclosure on Benghazi  now « Hot Air*


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 30, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > I would LOVE to see Gary Johnson get elected and the Libertarians gain more seats in Congress.
> ...



That would be great too, I'm not a fan of the republicans who support Romney. You are most likely a republican sheeple, Romney would be no better than Obama, they are pretty similar, if you had true Liberal Libertarian leanings, you would know that. 

Dinesh's "rational treatise" is only "rational" to wingnuts . Here's a prime example of the delusion shared by you people: "D'Souza says Obama removed a bust of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill from the Oval Office because Churchill represented British colonialism. *White House curator William Allman* said the bust, *which had been on loan, was already scheduled to be returned before Obama took office.* Another bust of Churchill is on display in the president's private residence, the White House says."  '2016: Obama's America' Fact-Check
'2016: Obama's America' Fact-Check

You don't have to be paid to be part of limbaugh or hannity's ignorant minions. 

He has the same fiscal policy as the neocon he replaced. He has the same domestic policy as the neocon he replaced, and he has pretty much the same foreign policy as the neocon Administration his Administration replaced. 

I disagree with him when he acts like a neocon. I disagreed with him when he signed the PA and NDAA. Will Romney issue an executive order to stop the above acts? Do you actually think that Romney has the ability to issue an executive order to stop the Affordable Care Act?  How will Romney be any different? 

Many of you republican "conservative" types are nothing but lying dishonest drama queens.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

tinydancer said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > tinydancer said:
> ...



Yet somehow you had to be prompted to post about F&F.  You're just doing a hatchet job.  Not a very effective one at that. Obama is cruising.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)




----------



## skye (Oct 30, 2012)

Benghazi matters because it showed to  American people and the world, how ingrained and deep  is the culture of lies from this Oba-boom-boom  Administration.


----------



## skye (Oct 30, 2012)

This Administration is a bunch of  liars .... burn in hell all ....


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 30, 2012)

Pheonixops said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Pheonixops said:
> ...



_*If you want us to prove this, why don't you personally call the 'dear leader' and ask him to release all the documents and DVD's of visual and audio documentaion of his fiasco in Ben Ghazi. We are sure that your pearls of wisdom will bring out the 'truth'. Strangely I personally did not post any information for the first week after this assaination of four Americans. As time has gone by we continue to peel the onion closer to the source and it keeps coming back Presidential orders. Like Fast & Furious will Obama claim "Executive Privilege" than the truth? *_


----------



## helltoupee (Oct 30, 2012)

Benghazi is a nonissue this election and the president's handling of this disaster is more than he needed to clinch the 2nd term. Romney acts completely lost/clueless all of a sudden.


----------



## Si modo (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Vel said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


And, being the retard that you are, you don't seem to grasp the idea of sovereignty of embassies.

Other than that and to the bolded, don't take any more of the brown acid.


----------



## Murf76 (Oct 30, 2012)

Anybody just see Greta's interview with Bing West?  He went through some of the military protocol that would've been involved.  What he's saying is that if Obama spoke correctly and gave the order that everything that could be done to get those guys out _should_ be done... there would be a written executive order to reflect it, and that to put the matter to rest Obama should be able to produce that order.  What's more, if he gave that order and Panetta, Dempsey, and Ham did otherwise... they'd have been disobeying a direct order from the president.  Not a very likely scenario if you ask me.


Oh... and those guys coming from Tripoli would've been HILLARY's guys, State Dept. security, not military.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 30, 2012)

Si modo said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Vel said:
> ...



The Embassy is in Tripoli.  Dumbass.


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2012)

helltoupee said:


> Benghazi is a nonissue this election and the president's handling of this disaster is more than he needed to clinch the 2nd term. Romney acts completely lost/clueless all of a sudden.





You've got to be kidding. No you're a liberal Obamabot. You're serious.


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2012)

skye said:


> Benghazi matters because it showed to  American people and the world, how ingrained and deep  is the culture of lies from this Oba-boom-boom  Administration.



They hit the ground running with lies. Bless the Libyan President for actually opening up a can of whoop ass on this Administration by standing by his claim that this was an organized terror attack.

I can't believe I just typed that, but it's true. The Libyan President was the one who held his ground on this and got people asking questions.


----------



## helltoupee (Oct 30, 2012)

tinydancer said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Benghazi matters because it showed to  American people and the world, how ingrained and deep  is the culture of lies from this Oba-boom-boom  Administration.
> ...



Sorry, not enough for Romney. Not a thought of a Patriot, rather, a thought of losing the election.


----------



## Si modo (Oct 30, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Si modo said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


No it isn't.

Not since February last year and staff who have been sent there to reopen it are recalled.

Do try to keep up.


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 30, 2012)

helltoupee said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...



It's quite obvious liberals don't care that the Administration let Americans die in Benghazi.

It's obvious you didn't care that F&F killed Brian Terry and many Mexicans.

We get it. You just want free phones from Bam Bam. All you care about is yourself and what you can get for free.

We understand.


----------



## helltoupee (Oct 30, 2012)

Libya is not Canada, that tragedy is not uncommon there. Benghazi is a nonissue this election, the president's handling of this disaster will be what gives Obama the easy victory. It was close, I admit, but this week will be Mitt's undoing, finito.


----------



## skye (Oct 30, 2012)

helltoupee said:


> Libya is not Canada, that tragedy is not uncommon there. Benghazi is a nonissue this election, the president's handling of this disaster will be what gives Obama the easy victory. It was close, I admit, but this week will be Mitt's undoing, finito.




I agree to disagree Benghazi is a mayor issue here.


----------



## helltoupee (Oct 30, 2012)

skye said:


> helltoupee said:
> 
> 
> > Libya is not Canada, that tragedy is not uncommon there. Benghazi is a nonissue this election, the president's handling of this disaster will be what gives Obama the easy victory. It was close, I admit, but this week will be Mitt's undoing, finito.
> ...



You're grasping, Sandy is the issue. Before that it was the economy, not Benghazi.


----------



## skye (Oct 30, 2012)

helltoupee said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > helltoupee said:
> ...



Both the economy and the cover up !


----------



## skye (Oct 31, 2012)

Obama has a problem with both the economy and Foreign Affairs.


----------



## helltoupee (Oct 31, 2012)

Not everyone listens to and absorbs Rush Limbaugh. Benghazi will have zero effect at the polls. It's already over, Romney is looking more and more incompetent while Obama is looking better than ever. Kinda makes the earlier "Romney Momentum" look like a joke now.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 31, 2012)

jwoodie said:


> 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> 
> 2.  It demonstrates the unconscionable elevation of politics over protection of American citizens.
> 
> ...



you a taffy puller at the fair again this year?


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 31, 2012)

skye said:


> helltoupee said:
> 
> 
> > Libya is not Canada, that tragedy is not uncommon there. Benghazi is a nonissue this election, the president's handling of this disaster will be what gives Obama the easy victory. It was close, I admit, but this week will be Mitt's undoing, finito.
> ...



It only matters if it is at the govenors level.


----------



## helltoupee (Oct 31, 2012)

skye said:


> Obama has a problem with both the economy and Foreign Affairs.



If you think that then why on earth would you want Romney?


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 31, 2012)

skye said:


> This Administration is a bunch of  liars .... burn in hell all ....



can you prove to me that Mittens has never lied?


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

Dante said:


> *Why Benghazi Doesn't Matter To Most Americans*
> 
> Most Americans are worried about jobs and the economy which are improving. Most Americans do not watch FOX News or hang out on the world wide web looking for issues to attack the President on in order to make Romney look good.
> 
> ...



It's not 1984 in America -- It's A Brave New World


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

asaratis said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > *Why Benghazi Doesn't Matter To Most Americans*
> ...



I guess you think your post actually adds something to the discussion.


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 31, 2012)

helltoupee said:


> Libya is not Canada, that tragedy is not uncommon there. Benghazi is a nonissue this election, the president's handling of this disaster will be what gives Obama the easy victory. It was close, I admit, but this week will be Mitt's undoing, finito.



It's not about what is common or uncommon in Libya. It's about a decision made by this Administration to not rescue Americans under fire in an American consulate because it was "too risky".

They let them die.


----------



## EriktheRed (Oct 31, 2012)

helltoupee said:


> Not everyone listens to and absorbs Rush Limbaugh. Benghazi will have zero effect at the polls. It's already over, Romney is looking more and more incompetent while Obama is looking better than ever. Kinda makes the earlier "Romney Momentum" look like a joke now.



It was already ending by the time the Romney camp and all its Con supporters even started using the word "momentum".


----------



## Claudette (Oct 31, 2012)

helltoupee said:


> Benghazi is a nonissue this election and the president's handling of this disaster is more than he needed to clinch the 2nd term. Romney acts completely lost/clueless all of a sudden.



You think Benghazi is a none issue?? You also think because he got FEMA to aid in a hurricane he's a shoe in for Prez??

Wow are you deluded.

The economy still sucks. UE is 7.8% which is a load of shit. Its actually around 14%. We still have a debt and deficit through the roof and Barrys total bag of lies over Benghazi is still on the news and is still a topic of discussion. 

Last I heard Romney isn't POTUS yet. Barry still bears that title and man what a waste of breath that guy is. 

His administration let four good men die because they didn't want to hurt Libyas feelings?? My god. Those guys fought a 7 hour battle waiting for help that didn't come. 

As far as I'm concerned Barry isn't worth the sweat of those mens balls and the job I have in mind for him concerns the rear end of my horse.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 31, 2012)

_Benghazi -- No Mere 'October Surprise'​_

*By: Jonah Goldberg
Benghazi -- No Mere 'October Surprise' - Jonah Goldberg - [page]
Oct 31, 2012


If you want to understand why conservatives have lost faith in the so-called mainstream media, you need to ponder the question: Where is the Benghazi feeding frenzy?
 Unlike some of my colleagues on the right, I don't think there's a conspiracy at work. Rather, I think journalists tend to act on their instincts (some even brag about this; you could look it up). And, collectively, the mainstream media's instincts run liberal, making groupthink inevitable.

In 2000, a Democratic operative orchestrated an "October surprise" attack on George W. Bush, revealing that 24 years earlier, he'd been arrested for drunk driving. The media went into a feeding frenzy. "Is all the 24-hour coverage of Bush's 24-year-old DUI arrest the product of a liberal media almost drunk on the idea of sinking him, or is it a legitimate, indeed unavoidable news story?" asked Howard Kurtz in a segment for his CNN show "Reliable Sources." The consensus among the guests: It wasn't a legitimate news story. But the media kept going with it.

One could go on and on. In September 2004, former CBS titan Dan Rather gambled his entire career on a story about Bush's service in the National Guard. His instincts were so powerful, he didn't thoroughly check the documents he relied on, which were forgeries. In 2008, the media feeding frenzy over John McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin, was so ludicrous it belonged in a Tom Wolfe novel. Over the last couple of years, the mainstream media has generally treated Occupy Wall Street as idealistic, the "tea parties" as racist and terrifying.

To be sure, there have been conservative feeding frenzies: about Barack Obama's pastor, John Kerry's embellishments of his war record, etc. But the mainstream media usually has tasked itself with the duty of debunking and dispelling such "hysteria."
 Last week, Fox News correspondent Jennifer Griffin reported that sources on the ground in Libya say they pleaded for support during the attack on the Benghazi consulate that led to the deaths of four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens. They were allegedly told twice to "stand down." Worse, there are suggestions that there were significant military resources available to counterattack, but requests for help were denied.

If true, the White House's concerted effort to blame the attack on a video crumbles, as do several other fraudulent claims. Yet, last Friday, the president boasted that "the minute I found out what was happening" in Benghazi, he ordered that everything possible be done to protect our personnel. That is either untrue, or he's being disobeyed on grave matters.

This isn't an "October surprise" foisted on the media by opposition research; it's news. *


----------



## Murf76 (Oct 31, 2012)

Well, that's the thing, isn't it?  If Obama gave the order to do whatever possible to save those guys, there would be a paper trail proving it.  And if he gave that order and it wasn't obeyed... why aren't we seeing action taken against whoever refused that order?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 31, 2012)

Dante said:


> I guess you think your post actually adds something to the discussion.



One thing is for sure dainty, no post by you has ever added anything to any discussion.

Now fuckoff and let the grownups talk.


----------



## Claudette (Oct 31, 2012)

Murf76 said:


> Well, that's the thing, isn't it?  If Obama gave the order to do whatever possible to save those guys, there would be a paper trail proving it.  And if he gave that order and it wasn't obeyed... why aren't we seeing action taken against whoever refused that order?




We also have a  General who  wasn't prepared to "stand down" and was inmmediately relieved of command. I'd like to see the paper trail on that bullshit. 

I don't think Benghazi is going away nor should it.


----------



## Cheddarmelon (Oct 31, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Liberal said:
> 
> 
> > I think the real question, if this is true is more over what a GUNSHIP would do..
> ...



so then... you MISSED the clips of how they ACTUALLY work... you know... live fire?

they don't work like COD.


----------



## jwoodie (Oct 31, 2012)

jwoodie said:


> 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> 
> 2.  It demonstrates the unconscionable elevation of politics over protection of American citizens.
> 
> ...



*Isn't it interesting that not one of the above points has been disputed, much less refuted?*


----------



## Qantrill (Oct 31, 2012)

konradv said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> ...



And the American people can especially recognize either:

An inept "community organizer", in way over his head as America's Commander-In-Chief, and grasping at straws for an excuse.

or:

An inept "community organizer" actually serving at the behest of or at the very least in bed with the "Muslim brotherhood" and who stood by and ordered a "stand down" of our available forces to STOP the ATTACK when the opportunity was still there to save the lives of our ambassador and the military personnel in that compound.

Osama bin-Obama is a snake.


----------



## Qantrill (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


>



*Yep...four (4) unnecessarily dead Americans at the hands of the MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD and the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES...NOT EXACTLY A MOLE HILL.*

Lady, and I use the term loosely, you are a REAL BITCH.


----------



## Liberal (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> All right.  Here is what really happened in Benghazi.  I have this from a reliable source in the comments section of a right wing oriented blog I read.
> 
> Ambassador Christopher Stevens and President Barack Obama were in a homosexual love triangle with Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.  Stevens blamed Obama for Terry's death and was "going to blow the lid off" the Fast & Furious scandal.  His inside information was going to bring down the whole Obama Administration, and possibly result in Obama serving some hard time.
> 
> ...



A+ 

I knew it was a conspiracy.

I am going to tell this to my friends, I will be sure to distort it even more when I tell it to them. Maybe I should make some poorly photoshopped images that miss the mark as well.

/Seriously funny though.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 31, 2012)

Qantrill said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...


----------



## Qantrill (Oct 31, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Qantrill said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



The sonofabitch should be yanked from office and tried for TREASON. He's a snake.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 31, 2012)




----------



## Claudette (Oct 31, 2012)

Murf76 said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > Well it seems we're at an empasse here. I don't think there's enough information available to make an intelligent evaluation of the situation nor do I see a reason to attack the President over this. You people are jumping up and down in outrage on the latest right wing anti-Obama trend that'll be replaced in a few weeks by some new outrage.
> ...



Good post and it hits the nail right on the head. 

If Barry had given the orders to do all to assist these men then how come that didn't happen?

Hell. General Hamm was ready and willing to lend support but was  relieved of duty because he wasn't prepared to "stand down." I'd love to see the paper trail on that bullshit. 

Its funny how those four dead mean don't seem to mean a lot to the Obama supporters on this board. Nothing but collateral damage in their eyes. Getting that fuck re-elected is way more important than four American lives. Good God. 

I can't even imagine the thoughts running through the minds of those three men as they fought a seven hour battle for their lives. Knowing their Govt let them down and let them die.


----------



## BlindBoo (Oct 31, 2012)

skye said:


> Benghazi matters because it showed to  American people and the world, how ingrained and deep  is the culture of lies from this Oba-boom-boom  Administration.



The culture of lies is what Mr. Sketch is all about.  It's really all he has left.  Lie as much as possible and hope to get the stupid red-neck voters so pissed off at the n&%#er in the white house that they will have to vote.


----------



## candycorn (Oct 31, 2012)

Qantrill said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



If this were 2013 or 2011, it wouldn't even register.  As per usual, right wing loons are just trying to smear their President.  It's expected, it's played, it's old; nobody cares.  See Fast and Furious...somehow that never gets brought up anymore and that was going to "bring down" Obama.  

Been there, done that, we know how the play ends.


----------



## BlindBoo (Oct 31, 2012)

jwoodie said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> ...



How do you refute dumb as dirt stupidity?


----------



## Qantrill (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Qantrill said:
> 
> 
> > Lady, and I use the term loosely, you are a REAL BITCH.
> ...



YOUR president (community organizer) bitch.


----------



## Againsheila (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Qantrill said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



You don't care that those Americans were killed in Libya and that our government refused to send them help?????

I told you there was something wrong with this world.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 31, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> How do you refute dumb as dirt stupidity?



No one is trying to refute you, Boo.

The question what why the Obamabots hadn't attempted the points posted earlier.

The answer to that of course is simply that DailyKOS hasn't programmed you yet.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 31, 2012)




----------



## Qantrill (Oct 31, 2012)

Againsheila said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Qantrill said:
> ...



I adjusted Candy Corn's photo to better represent her personna.


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 31, 2012)

Fast and Furious isn't over and Benghazi is just beginning.


----------



## Claudette (Oct 31, 2012)

Yeah. The death of four men is "seriously funny."

What an asshole you are.


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

Claudette said:


> Yeah. The death of four men is "seriously funny."
> 
> What an asshole you are.



Conjuring up conspiracy theories with no supporting evidence dishonors the dead.  Whether it is a 9/11 WTC conspiracy theory, or a 9/11 Benghazi conspiracy theory.  It is disgusting behavior.  The people who came up with the idea a missile hit the Pentagon without explaining what happened to all the people who died on the flight that actually hit the Pentagon, or the idea Obama watched the men in Benghazi die are the real assholes.

The parody I created was a slap in the face to those who are dishonoring the dead.  They are so retarded that if I wanted to, I could write it in such a way that people would accept it as true without question.

These assholes need to STFU.

.


----------



## mamooth (Oct 31, 2012)

The kooks are frustrated because no one is paying attention to them. The explanation for that is simple. The rest of America isn't as 'effin stupid as these conservative cranks.

They won't accept that, of course. They themselves fall hard for every idiot conspiracy theory, so they demand every else must become as gullible as themselves. And they get so upset when people won't join their crank crusade, so you see them here, stamping their widdle feet and pouting.

On the bright side, they do send a lot of votes to the Democrats. And they'll be amusing for the next 4 years of Obama's presidency.


----------



## Annie (Oct 31, 2012)

Slowly, but surely the MSM is beginning to cover it:

What was Obama told at the September 10, 2012, NSC meeting on &lsquo;9/11 threats&rsquo;? - PostPartisan - The Washington Post




> Posted at 12:54 PM ET, 10/31/2012
> 
> TheWashingtonPost
> What was Obama told at the September 10, 2012, NSC meeting on 9/11 threats?
> ...


----------



## GoneBezerk (Oct 31, 2012)

I'll go check to see if this is true about the AC-130, but I wouldn't doubt it.

Liberals here show their stupidity when they claim the AC-130 would just kill everyone on the ground if it engaged targets. They can shoot a truck to pieces while leaving a truck next to it intact, you dumbfucks.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 31, 2012)

mamooth said:


> The kooks are frustrated because no one is paying attention to them. The explanation for that is simple. The rest of America isn't as 'effin stupid as these conservative cranks.
> 
> They won't accept that, of course. They themselves fall hard for every idiot conspiracy theory, so they demand every else must become as gullible as themselves. And they get so upset when people won't join their crank crusade, so you see them here, stamping their widdle feet and pouting.
> 
> On the bright side, they do send a lot of votes to the Democrats. And they'll be amusing for the next 4 years of Obama's presidency.


----------



## Vel (Oct 31, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Vel said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



 Tell me, was invading another country's airspace considered when the Seals were going after Bin Laden? And please, don't make lame excuses for why those brave Seals in Libya didn't get back up. The U.S. could have sent a low flying fighter plane just for the noise and it would have helped. And I believe our military could certainly have hit their target with a lot of collateral damage.


----------



## Vel (Oct 31, 2012)

tinydancer said:


> Fast and Furious isn't over and Benghazi is just beginning.



No, This will not go away. Even if Obama by some way manages to get re-elected, this will be dealt with.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 31, 2012)

_WaPo opinion: What was Obama told at the September 10, 2012, NSC meeting on 9/11 threats?​_


*By: Marc A. Thiessen 
October 31, 2012 



On the White House Web site, the presidents calendar for September 10, 2012  the day before the Benghazi, Libya, attack  is blank and and the daily press guidance says The President has no public events scheduled. 

But the president did have an important meeting that day. In an e-mail exchange over President Obamas record of skipping his daily intelligence meetings, National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor wrote me the following: 

Id also note that this focus on just the PDB and not the countless other NSC meetings the President has each week really misses the point. For example, the President had a briefing with the Principals Committee to review 9/11 threats and mitigation efforts on September 10th. Seems like a relevant data point for you[r] piece.


(Excerpt) 

Read more: 
What was Obama told at the September 10, 2012, NSC meeting on &lsquo;9/11 threats&rsquo;? - PostPartisan - The Washington Post*


----------



## Mr. H. (Oct 31, 2012)

The schlock thickens...


----------



## Liability (Oct 31, 2012)

He was probably told:  

"nuttin' to worry about, there, Mr. President.  After all, you whacked bin Laden, didn't you?  Go get some golf in."


----------



## asaratis (Oct 31, 2012)

konradv said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...



Typical leftie deflection to a totally different topic.  Thanks again!


----------



## asaratis (Oct 31, 2012)

konradv said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...



Benghazi isn't "taking" because the MSM kisses Obama's ass.  They praised him without vetting and got him elected ...now they can't back off and recognize that he is a lying, cowardly piece of shit...as demonstrated in the Benghazi saga.

Obama worshipers certainly think Benghazi should be swept under the rug.  I'll be surprised if Obama ever tells the fucking truth!


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 31, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



They you go again with that "dear leader", the only people I see referring to him that way are right wing loons. Thanks for the laugh. 
I want them to have a bi partisan investigation regarding Benghazi. I don't refer to anyone as "dear leader".


----------



## francoHFW (Oct 31, 2012)

OP- shows once and for all that RWers inhabit a total BS alternate universe, if F+F hadn't...


----------



## BlindBoo (Oct 31, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> _WaPo opinion: What was Obama told at the September 10, 2012, NSC meeting on 9/11 threats?​_
> 
> 
> *By: Marc A. Thiessen
> ...



It took almost 3 and a half years to get Preisdent Bushes Aug. 6th PDB declassified and released.

But......keep howling moonbats.


----------



## EriktheRed (Oct 31, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> But......keep howling moonbats.



No, no, no...

Us lefties are moonbats. They're _wingnuts_. 


And this Benghazi nontroversy has 'em getting especially wingy lately, too.


----------



## jwoodie (Oct 31, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



*First, consult a dictionary.  Then try again.*


----------



## shock (Oct 31, 2012)

Whatever the facts,
it is unlikely Obama knew,
or had reason to know,
of the need for additional protection of the embassy.

Hilary, however, had a personal
and apparently deep and abiding interest 
in the leadup to the attack
for it was Hilary who said 
"Gaddafi dead or alive"
and after Gaddafi had been tortured
and a bayonet stuck up his ass
while he was alive
later said:
"We came, we saw-he died."

Hilary was Secretary of State,
and still is.
and is likely to be replaced by such a person as
Panetta, or Petraeus, or Rice or Powers.

Hilary knew or should have known of the need
and of its lack of fulfillment
and whatever happened, happened on her watch.


SHOCKLEY


----------



## Lakhota (Oct 31, 2012)

Benghazi Political Fail


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Oct 31, 2012)

Brett Bair is breaking news right now on a new cable that Fox News has obtained from the Benghazi scandal.... More to come.......


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 31, 2012)

like a coaxial cable?


----------



## LoneLaugher (Oct 31, 2012)

Shut up. 

We were attacked by assholes. You are an asshole. Does this hit home?


----------



## Lakhota (Oct 31, 2012)

No one gives a shit but NaziCons.  Normal people will wait for the final investigative facts to be reported.


----------



## The Infidel (Oct 31, 2012)

What a mess


----------



## jillian (Oct 31, 2012)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> Brett Bair is breaking news right now on a new cable that Fox News has obtained from the Benghazi scandal.... More to come.......



Another mindless thread from the mindless o/p


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Oct 31, 2012)

Newt promises more emails and damaging cables to be released.. This is just the first one.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Oct 31, 2012)

Lakhota said:


> Normal people will wait for the final investigative facts to be reported.



Yes normal people know we need an investigation so the President can tell us why he said it was about movie.


----------



## SniperFire (Oct 31, 2012)

This is bad. 



Real, real bad.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 31, 2012)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> Newt promises more emails and damaging cables to be released.. This is just the first one.



CAT 5 cable?


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

Bret Baier.

.


----------



## Lakhota (Oct 31, 2012)

Benghazi Political Fail


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 31, 2012)

_Americas Shame Continues, The Butcher of Benhgazi Dont Know Nothing​_


*By: Skook



Four Senators out of one hundred have asked the president to explain why we and our military have been humiliated by terrorists and why he let four American heroes be butchered.
Continue reading &#8594;
America&#8217;s Shame Continues, The Butcher of Benhgazi Don&#8217;t Know Nothing | Flopping Aces*


----------



## The Infidel (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> Bret Baier.
> 
> .



He is a good guy


----------



## Lakhota (Oct 31, 2012)

Benghazi Political Fail


----------



## del (Oct 31, 2012)

newt promises

that's some funny shit right there


----------



## SniperFire (Oct 31, 2012)

Why did you deceive us, Mr. President?


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

This breathless rush to report about a report which hasn't even been reported yet is hilarious.  

Objectivity is a thing of the past.

.


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Oct 31, 2012)

SniperFire said:


> Why did you deceive us, Mr. President?



I am in my office so I didn't hear the entire details but it was very damning.. they're going over it right now ..


----------



## del (Oct 31, 2012)

i didn't hear it, but it confirms what i want to believe.


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

del said:


> i didn't hear it, but it confirms what i want to believe.



You hate America!!!!


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Oct 31, 2012)

Libruls are nervous or they wouldn't flood these threads with their asinine comments.. They should be nervous..  Their President made the decision to allow Americans to die over politics,


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

btw, Ben Ghazzi Used a Dildo attached to a cable on Lady Liberty and Obama watched


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> Libruls are nervous or they wouldn't flood these threads with their asinine comments.. They should be nervous..  Their President made the decision to allow Americans to die over politics,



Americans are immune to FOX News Alerts or they would flee from these threads with their welfare checks and food stamps


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Oct 31, 2012)

Dante said:


> btw, Ben Ghazzi Used a Dildo attached to a cable on Lady Liberty and Obama watched



You just created a stoopid thread in the flame zone with the same LAME ass comment..

Wow.. OMG! ROFLMAO


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> Libruls are nervous or they wouldn't flood these threads with their asinine comments.. They should be nervous..  Their President made the decision to allow Americans to die over politics,



And the cable is from Obama, right?  And it says, "Fuck you, Stevens".  Right?

Not one shred of evidence has been provided to show the President personally told the troops to "stand down".

Not one.

Keep that in your hallucinogenic mind when the Fox News doom music gets your heart all a'flutter.

.


----------



## del (Oct 31, 2012)

Dante said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > i didn't hear it, but it confirms what i want to believe.
> ...



indeed i do. 

between my ssdi payments, sec 8 and ebt cards, i can barely scrape together enough for an occasional eight ball and a hooker once a week.

some fucking country this is


----------



## del (Oct 31, 2012)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> Libruls are nervous or they wouldn't flood these threads with their asinine comments.. They should be nervous..  Their President made the decision to allow Americans to die over politics,



yeah, but bush is out of office now

it's all good, pooflinger


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

del said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



I only qualify for sdi payments and sec 8.,,,,  EBT is beneath my station


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

del said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



If you don't believe Obama personally ordered the death of Ambassador Stevens, even though this idea was completely made up, you are not a real American.

.


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> LadyGunSlinger said:
> 
> 
> > Libruls are nervous or they wouldn't flood these threads with their asinine comments.. They should be nervous..  Their President made the decision to allow Americans to die over politics,
> ...


Obama is the anti Christ and Romney is the White Horse


or is it the other way around?


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



Of course he did. He hates America and that is why we have to take it back!!!


----------



## del (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



i'll have to check my longform birth certificate, but i'm pretty sure i'm an illegal from malaysia.


----------



## Dreamy (Oct 31, 2012)

*Is Word of the Benghazi Scandal Leaking Out? | Power Line*

*Posted on October 31, 2012 *

*The coverup is what gets them everytime.*


----------



## OODA_Loop (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> Not one shred of evidence has been provided to show the President personally told the troops to "stand down".
> 
> Not one.
> 
> ...



Because he won't answer questions.


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

Did somebody mention Malaysia? 

Former MP asks DAP to give PSM a chance
A former DAP member of parliament has suggested that the DAP give way to leaders of the 

yet-to-be-registered Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) to contest in their desired seats to 

avoid a three-way fight in the coming general election.
Former MP asks DAP to give PSM a chance - Malaysiakini


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

[youtube]2bQZ6l_cq5Y[/youtube]

I heard the Obama allied Islamo Fascist terrorists in Libya played Iron Butterfly through loudspeakers as they attacked America's fallen heroes


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

New reputation!
Hi, you have received -497 reputation points from LadyGunSlinger.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
Right back atcha you lame crybaby! LMAO

Regards,
LadyGunSlinger

----------------------------
Mayday

Mayday, mayday, I'm being held captive by a pig lady

Mayday, mayday, I'm being held captive by a pig lady


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

OODA_Loop said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > Not one shred of evidence has been provided to show the President personally told the troops to "stand down".
> ...



So let me get this straight.

If I invent some fantastic claim, the President has to answer my questions about it?


Doesn't work that way.  Some fuckheads invented a fantasy whereby Obama was watching the whole thing live and told the troops to stand down over the screams for help.  This is a complete fabrication.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  Where is it?

Now the nutters have dug themselves a hole and expect Obama to pull them out of it?  

No answer will satisfy them if it does not fit into their fantasy.  If Obama and everyone involved swear on a stack of Bibles, under oath, that Obama did not watch the attack, the nutters will just scream, "COVERUP!!!"

These subjective fantasies will bite them all in the ass.  They have joined the birthers and Loose Changers in the nutball category.

.


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > btw, Ben Ghazzi Used a Dildo attached to a cable on Lady Liberty and Obama watched
> ...



and you create a stoopid thread every time you post

Mayday, mayday, I'm being held captive by a pig lady in a stoopid thread


----------



## skye (Oct 31, 2012)

I hope all the truth will be revealed to the people before November 6.

I hope the media will  finally do its job and publish it.... the cover up  on the Benghazi fiasco  has been disgraceful.

This Administration and those who protect it  have  no shame!


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

Just remember, kids.  

That Obama was watching the attack on the consulate has been stated as a fact.  Not a supposition.  A fact.

You cannot state something as fact without evidence and expect to get away with that.

Produce it now or you will have to concede you made that shit up, and repeat it because you want to believe it.  

.


----------



## tjvh (Oct 31, 2012)

konradv said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...



Boy, you stepped right into that one and then you're going to try to squirm out with a completely nonsensical reference... How's your own foot taste?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> So let me get this straight.
> If I invent some fantastic claim, the President has to answer my questions about it?



Simply and un-fantastically why he and his administration told us it was about a movie for weeks while his VP procalimed on national TV during the debate it was due to an _intelligence failure_ when the intelligence shows the Americans on the ground requested help (prior to and actively during) but it did not arrive and in any fashion.


----------



## Dreamy (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > g5000 said:
> ...


 
I am not up on this scandal but there is definitely a deja vu feel from when the Dems were alway on the Bush administrations' asses for various alleged "scandals" so honestly it is kind of amusing to see the roles reversed.


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

skye said:


> I hope all the truth will be revealed...



Mayday, mayday, I'm being held captive by a pig lady in the Skye!!!!


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 31, 2012)

LoneLaugher said:


> Shut up.
> 
> We were attacked by assholes. You are an asshole. Does this hit home?



You should hold your breath until you turn blue. That will make the mean conservatives stop telling the truth!


----------



## Dreamy (Oct 31, 2012)

OODA_Loop said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > So let me get this straight.
> ...


 


> ...while his VP procalimed on national TV during the debate it was due to an _intelligence failure_


 
Well Pres. Obama's VP would know a thing or two about that matter.


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

AmericanFirst said:


> The only thing TRUE Americans care about is the fact that obamaturd and his admin sat there and watched and refused to do anything while the attack was happening and then LIED about the fact they knew and tried to blame a video when the blame is on obamaturds shoulders. IDIOT!!!!!!!!!



Please provide the evidence Obama sat and watched and refused to do anything while the attack was happening.

Thank you.

.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 31, 2012)

del said:


> newt promises
> 
> that's some funny shit right there



Maybe if you go outside, drop your depends and jack off, it will distract from Obama's chicanery, fuckwad...

Hey, you do what you can...


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

Conservative said:


> > _Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer (ret.) is a former senior intelligence officer and the New York Times bestselling author of Operation "DARK HEART: Spycraft an Special Operations on the Frontlines of Afghanistan  And The Path to Victory."  He is the Director of External Communications for the Center for Advanced Defense Studies (CADS) and Senior Advisor on the Congressional Task Force on National and Homeland Security._
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Please provide the evidence Obama sat and watched and refused to do anything while the attack was happening.

Thank you.


.


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

Vel said:


> BlindBoo said:
> 
> 
> > Of course Benhgazi matters.  All terrorist attacks matter and we need to punish the terrorists responsible.  However to Faux News the dead Americans don't really matter all that much, all that matters is to try and use their deaths as a political tool against the President.  Just like they tried to do with that ATF gun walking program.
> ...



I would like to hear from the actual people involved that they were asking for help and were turned down.  I would like to hear from the actual people involved they were told to stand down, and _who told them_ to stand down.  Then I would like to know where the order to stand down _originated_.  

I would like to hear any evidence Obama was personally involved.



.


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

No one cares about Libya. It's a fox news issue


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> Please provide the evidence Obama sat and watched and refused to do anything while the attack was happening.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> .



Yeah, because if he can't prove that Obama sat and watched and refused to do anything while the attack was happening, then the 14 days of complete lies by the administration don't matter!


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

PredFan said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > You know if the right-wing could stop crying and actually pick some relevant things to attack the President on instead of all these utterly retarded attacks that just drown each other out, they might actually have a reasonable argument.
> ...



Please provide the evidence Obama sat and watched and refused to do anything while the attack was happening.

Thank you.


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > Please provide the evidence Obama sat and watched and refused to do anything while the attack was happening.
> ...



He made the claim.  I want to see his evidence.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.


Otherwise, he made that shit up.  Simple as that.

.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 31, 2012)

Dante said:


> No one cares about Libya. It's a fox news issue



Sure they don't, fuckwad.

Fox News poll: Voters disapprove of Obama on economy, Libya | Fox News


----------



## tjvh (Oct 31, 2012)

Dante said:


> No one cares about Libya. It's a fox news issue



You're right... They care about the Americans that died there, and the Obama administration lying to the American people about a video to cover up acts of Terrorism.


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

Go outside into the real world and ask the first ten people you meet if they know wtf you are all talking about,


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> He made the claim.  I want to see his evidence.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.



Fact is, that if his claim is true, it furthers the damage to Obama. If it isn't, it does nothing to change the coverup by the administration.

It's a lose/lose for Obama.



> Otherwise, he made that shit up.  Simple as that.
> 
> .



I don't see anything new on emails on Fox, but I'll wait to see what get's posted.


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

tjvh said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > No one cares about Libya. It's a fox news issue
> ...



no they don't. once you step away from the computer console it all makes sense.


being stuck on stupid is all you are


----------



## Dante (Oct 31, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > He made the claim.  I want to see his evidence.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
> ...



It's a lunatic lunacy for the right wing nutso-sphere


----------



## bodecea (Oct 31, 2012)

This is like the 24/7 FOX did on Anna Nichole Smith's death.


----------



## idb (Oct 31, 2012)

Just a query.
If Woods and the others were working for a private security firm, who were they in contact with on the radio when they were calling for help?


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > He made the claim.  I want to see his evidence.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
> ...



It it isn't true, then the big losers are the nutters who made that shit up.  Their integrity is shot forever.  

And that will make Obama come out a winner.  That's how Unconservatives pulling shit out of their ass do so much damage.





Uncensored2008 said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > Otherwise, he made that shit up.  Simple as that.
> ...



That is EXACTLY what everyone should be doing.  Waiting for the FACTS.

What a shameful way to treat the dead.  Making up complete fabrications about their final moments.  Not a shred of decency in the lot of them.

Jesus wept.

.


----------



## bodecea (Oct 31, 2012)

Dante said:


> Go outside into the real world and ask the first ten people you meet if they know wtf you are all talking about,



Exactly.


----------



## tjvh (Oct 31, 2012)

Dante said:


> tjvh said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



You Obama fluffers will never argue rationally, you're a fucking moron if you think the President and his administration lying to the American people is a non-issue.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 31, 2012)

Dante said:


> Go outside into the real world and ask the first ten people you meet if they know wtf you are all talking about,



Done, and most think Obama screwed the pooch on Libya.

Yeah, they don't know the details, but they know that our Ambassador is dead, and that Obama lied.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 31, 2012)

Dante said:


> It's a lunatic lunacy for the right wing nutso-sphere



Dante, you're a mindless hack. Your rants are meaningless.


----------



## skye (Oct 31, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > It's a lunatic lunacy for the right wing nutso-sphere
> ...


----------



## emilynghiem (Oct 31, 2012)

helltoupee said:


> Benghazi is a nonissue this election and the president's handling of this disaster is more than he needed to clinch the 2nd term. Romney acts completely lost/clueless all of a sudden.



Dear HT: if this indicates Obama's strategy (to avoid early intervention, wait until after it is over, then do accountability afterwards) we are in deep trouble!

I was hoping to work with fellow Democrats to save a national historic site from destruction.
I live in a district with 8 remaining African American historic churches, built by Freed Slaves as the only landmark of its kind in the entire country. But the Democrat administration seems to follow this same protocol of waiting until AFTER the damage is done, and then saying it's too late, there is nothing they can do. There is not enough proactive commitment to protect national interests in advance while we had the chance, only damage assessment afterwards.

If the Democrats are too afraid to take chances of stirring things or overstepping bounds,
and prefer to wait until after the damage is done, this explains why I am getting nowhere.

Also, HT if you plan to vote Democrat, are YOU willing to pay the damages and debts incurred by the Democrat party and leadership in cases like this? 

I wonder how much of this passive or negligent decision-making strategy is at the expense of others, and that is why it keeps happening! If the cost of such negligence was borne by the Parties who make them, would there be more incentive to change strategies? Or to delegate authority to people willing to make the tough calls, in order to prevent the risk of incurring irreparable costs afterwards? How can you accept responsibilities of office, or VOTE for these people, and then not take responsibility for the policies and decisions?


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> Conservative said:
> 
> 
> > > _Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer (ret.) is a former senior intelligence officer and the New York Times bestselling author of Operation "DARK HEART: Spycraft an Special Operations on the Frontlines of Afghanistan  And The Path to Victory."  He is the Director of External Communications for the Center for Advanced Defense Studies (CADS) and Senior Advisor on the Congressional Task Force on National and Homeland Security._
> ...



As far as I've read, Obama slept thru it. That important fundraiser in Vegas was the next day.

There is no doubt whatsoever that Panetta made the decision not to send in troops to rescue them because it was too risky. 

I've put up his direct quote from a press conference in other posts.

So, yes. They let them die.


----------



## Murf76 (Oct 31, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > Please provide the evidence Obama sat and watched and refused to do anything while the attack was happening.
> ...



Obama is the only guy who _could_ have done anything.  Our military doesn't just run off and do as it pleases.  They need orders.  OBVIOUSLY they either didn't get them or the orders were disobeyed.  There's no other explanation.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> It it isn't true, then the big losers are the nutters who made that shit up.  Their integrity is shot forever.



Nonsense. If the story is false, no one will remember in a week.



> And that will make Obama come out a winner.  That's how Unconservatives pulling shit out of their ass do so much damage.



??

LOL

I don't think so.

The lie campaign against Romney criticizing the Fiat announcement to move Jeep to China is more damaging..

The DNC press will say nothing of Benghazi.




> That is EXACTLY what everyone should be doing.  Waiting for the FACTS.
> 
> What a shameful way to treat the dead.  Making up complete fabrications about their final moments.  Not a shred of decency in the lot of them.
> 
> ...



You realize the emails are confirmed, right? Obama knew it was a terrorist attack within two hours, and chose to lie to America.  Yes, the DNC press and the administration have done what they can to spin it, but the fact is that Obama, Biden, Clinton, Rice, and Carney, deliberately and callously lied to the American people, blaming some obscure YouTube video with 11 hits, for what they KNEW to be a well planned Al Qaeda attack.

This crosses into Nixon territory, there is no excuse, none at all.


----------



## emilynghiem (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> That is EXACTLY what everyone should be doing.  Waiting for the FACTS.
> 
> What a shameful way to treat the dead.  Making up complete fabrications about their final moments.  Not a shred of decency in the lot of them.
> 
> ...



Dear G5000: You should see the interview with Charles Woods, father of Ty Woods. 
Instead of the President sharing words of comfort to the father, which wasn't happening anyway, this father used this opportunity to try to counsel the President. He knew Obama "was not at peace" and he urged him to make sure he is right with God and "change his direction" to be at peace.  That's how the father of one of the Navy Seals "exploited" this issue - to help the President spiritually - it was deeply touching.
I can see how that man fathered a Navy Seal who would put his own life down for others.
This father, in his grief, was more thankful for the peace of mind he has from God, and wanted to share that with the President. He cared more for the President's soul he saw was suffering, than for his own bereavement he was trusting to God. Just beautiful and pure.


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

Murf76 said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > g5000 said:
> ...



You know nothing of how the military works.  Do you think every military action requires Presidential approval?  Are you really that stupid?

The military has rules of engagement which direct their actions.



.


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 31, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Go outside into the real world and ask the first ten people you meet if they know wtf you are all talking about,
> ...



Not only did Obama and the Administration lie about this being a "spontaneous attack" by protestors over a video they compounded the idiocy by apologizing to the Muslim world for the video. 

Bottom line they had to. Considering they'd been pushing the narrative that AQ was dead and Obama was to get all the credit.

This messed up their world for true.


----------



## g5000 (Oct 31, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > It it isn't true, then the big losers are the nutters who made that shit up.  Their integrity is shot forever.
> ...



I seeeee...

So it is okay to make shit up, because no one will remember!  What a fantastic moral code these liars live by.  This explains so much.





Uncensored2008 said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > And that will make Obama come out a winner.  That's how Unconservatives pulling shit out of their ass do so much damage.
> ...



But you just said no one will remember a lie next week.  Make up your mind!



Uncensored2008 said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > That is EXACTLY what everyone should be doing.  Waiting for the FACTS.
> ...



That has NOTHING to do with the FABRICATION that Obama SAT AND WATCHED STEVENS DIE and did nothing.  

Shameless fabrication of his last moments on Earth.

.


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> Murf76 said:
> 
> 
> > Uncensored2008 said:
> ...



What I'd like to know is when is it not risky to rescue Americans under attack? You see this was Panetta's whole defense of this situation of just leaving them to die.

That it was too risky to rescue them.

 So is it ok to send in troops to rescue Americans under attack by by Grade 1 students? Or under attack by gerbils?

Because those case scenarios wouldn't be risky for a rescue team?


----------



## Murf76 (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > g5000 said:
> ...



The FACTS are that those guys are dead.  The FACTS are that there wasn't enough security, not even after it was requested, and even not in caution of the anniversary of 9/11.   The FACTS are that for nearly two weeks, this administration spent their time talking about a youtube video when it's been proved that they KNEW this was a terrorist attack.  The FACTS are no help came when the annex was under attack, even though everyone admits that communications never broke down and that there was real time video.  The FACTS are that if Obama really did whatever possible to save those guys, SOMEBODY would've showed up, because there were assets near enough to get there.  

So, either he didn't give that order or that order was disobeyed.  But he's not telling us which when obviously he could if he wanted to.  Which means... he doesn't want to.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> That has NOTHING to do with the FABRICATION that Obama SAT AND WATCHED STEVENS DIE and did nothing.



The indication is there was a Predator on station over the action.   IF this is true.

- Did the Situation Room have the Predator feed ?  I think the answer is the capability is proven to be there (OBL raid) and most likely.

- Did aid or counter-fire ever arrive on scene in Benghazi ? The answer is no.

The next line of rational and responsible questioning is what was the status of in theater deployable assets and their top-down response to any requests for aid.

Very simple.


----------



## tinydancer (Oct 31, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > It it isn't true, then the big losers are the nutters who made that shit up.  Their integrity is shot forever.
> ...



Have you seen this?

* McCAIN-GRAHAM-AYOTTE-JOHNSON LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA:

October 31, 2012

President Barack Obama&#8232;
The White House&#8232;
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW&#8232;
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

The American people deserve to know all the facts surrounding the terrorist attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, that resulted in the murder of four Americansincluding Ambassador Chris Stevens. Unfortunately, you and your senior administration officials have not been forthcoming in providing answers to the many questions that have emerged.

On October 9, 2012, we sent a letter to the senior intelligence officials in your administration in an effort to obtain answers to these questions. More than three weeks have passed, and we still have not received a response. To make matters worse, since that original letter, we sent several subsequent letters to you or to your senior administration officials asking a number of questions, and we have failed to receive a single letter in response.

The American people and their representatives in Congress need to understand what you knew about the Benghazi terrorist attack and when you knew it. We also have a right to know what steps you and your administration tookor failed to takebefore, during, and after the terrorist attack to protect American lives.*

Rest is at the link. They're pissed off and rightfully so. 

Senators Again Urge Obama to Answer Key Questions about Benghazi Attack | The Weekly Standard


----------



## Connery (Oct 31, 2012)

tinydancer said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > g5000 said:
> ...




What is the deadline in the letter? There is an ongoing investigation regarding this situation.

The following is an assessment from someone who served there.

"Eric Allan Nordstrom, Regional Security Officer, Tripoli, Libya from September 21,
2011-July 26, 2012
At the request of Chairman Issa, and the Committee On Oversight & Government
Reform
Hearing on Security Failures in Benghazi, Tripoli on September 11, 2012
10 October 2012​
Let me say a word about the evening of September 11th. The ferocity and intensity of the attack was nothing that we had seen in Libya, or that I had seen in my time in the Diplomatic Security Service. Having an extra foot of wall, or an extra-half dozen guards or agents would not have enabled us to respond to that kind of assault. Im concerned that this attack will signal a new security-reality, just as the 1984 Beirut attack did for the Marines; the 1998 East Africa bombings did for the State Department, and 9/11 for the whole country. It is critical that we balance the risk-mitigation with the needs of our diplomats to do their job, in dangerous and uncertain places. The answer cannot be to operate from a bunker.

It was my understanding and the understanding of my successor that TDY staffing levels in Tripoli would be reduced as our bodyguard unit expanded. When I departed on July 26, 2012, the mission had the following DS staffing: 3 permanent RSOs, 4 TDY Hight Trained field office DS agents, 4 MSD DS Agents focused on bodyguard training, 16 local Libyan bodyguards, and 3 TDY DS agents in Benghazi. The 16 member SST was scheduled for a phased departure by mid-August. Finally, there was on-going planning to retain 6 of the 16 SST members in Libya to engage in more traditional bilateral Department of Defense training activities with the Libyan Ministry of Defense.

Im confident that the committee will conclude that Department of State, Diplomatic Security Service, and Mission Libya officers conducted themselves professionally and with careful attention to managing people and budgets in a way that reflects the gravity of their task. Im proud of the work that our team accomplished in Libya under extraordinarily difficult circumstances."

http://oversight.house.gov/wp-conten...ent-Final1.pdf

I want answers as well. Whether Obama or Romney  Obama is the next president, it does not matter who is this situation cannot happen again.


----------



## GuyPinestra (Oct 31, 2012)

g5000 said:


> Vel said:
> 
> 
> > BlindBoo said:
> ...



Fuck off, G, the guys asking for the help are all DEAD! 

The commanding General of AFRICOM was relieved of duty when he disobeyed a direct order to 'stand down'. Now who do you know with THAT power that isn't up to their neck in this Administration?


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 31, 2012)

_Rumors of General Officers Arrested, Relieved, or Resigning in Protest​_




*Blackfive:


Weve received many emails over the last week or so from readers asking us to get to the bottom of this situation/rumors du jourIm not sure that we can actually do that quickly, but here is what weve been hearing

First of all, over the last week there have been many reports that the AFRICOM commander, GEN Carter Ham, had been arrested by his second in command and relieved of command.  The reasoning in several articles from journalists and bloggers is that GEN Ham was ready to violate a do-not-assist order with regards to Benghazi. I would think that there are too many people who would know about this that could keep an event like that as quiet as it seems to have been kept.

GEN Ham, with 42 years under his belt, could actually retire TOMORROW, and we should see what he has to say when he retires.  Since the announcement of his being replaced, GEN Ham has been seen speaking at several functions.  Hardly the position of someone who was arrested for insubordinationor as some are suggesting, the leader of a coup.  But it is possible that he was removed for violating orders in a manner without arrest.

On back channel, there has been talk that GEN Ham is actually being relieved for another mission  one that was denied airspace access by a sovereign nation, and that GEN Ham intentionally violated airspace rules/laws in order to complete a mission (not Benghazi).  There is also talk that GEN Ham is resigning in disgust of the chain of command  literally, with the Commander in Chief  and that he is trying to do so as apolitically as possible (and Ham is seen as being one of the Presidents guys).  One would think that someone would wait for an election just days away to be over before resigning in protest (because you might have a new CinC), but who knows?  On Monday, GEN Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declared that GEN Hams departure was part of a planned rotation in the works since July.  Hhmmm

Then, we have an up and coming Rear Admiral being relieved of command of the Stennis carrier group.  This is significant as it is not due to conduct unbecoming, personal conduct, or for incompetence, but for inappropriate leadership judgment.  What?!
Admiral Charles M. Gaouette was relieved of command mid-deployment which is rare (understatement).  From the AP:Navy replaces admiral leading Mideast strike group - FederalNewsRadio.com 
Read more:
BLACKFIVE: Rumors of General Officers Arrested, Relieved, or Resigning in Protest*


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 31, 2012)

And??????


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 31, 2012)

OP has no point.


----------



## GoneBezerk (Oct 31, 2012)

Idiot foreigner sticking your nose in our business....they were CIA or working for the CIA, thus were in contact with people in the CIA in VA. 

There goes your theory they didn't have the right to call back for help....



idb said:


> Just a query.
> If Woods and the others were working for a private security firm, who were they in contact with on the radio when they were calling for help?


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 31, 2012)

Pheonixops said:


> And??????



*Obviously you haven't been keeping up. On September 11, 2012 within minutes of a discussion with the Pentagon/White House and being told to 'Stand Down' General Carter Ham was relieved of duty.

Read more:
AFRICOM Commander GEN Carter Ham relieved of duty for wanting to help our Ambassador to Libya.
The information I heard today was that General [Carter] Ham as head of Africom received the same e-mails the White House received requesting help/support as the attack was taking place. General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready.

General Ham then received the order to stand down. His response was to screw it, he was going to help anyhow.
 Within 30 seconds to a minute after making the move to respond, his second in command apprehended General Ham and told him that he was now relieved of his command.

The story continues that now General Rodiguez would take General Hams place as the head of Africom.*


----------



## GoneBezerk (Oct 31, 2012)

Military leaders in Germany and DC aren't going to standby and keep quiet over this bullshit. 

Obamination will be trashed in the media once these people are retired. He has no authority over telling people to not tell the truth.


----------



## bodecea (Oct 31, 2012)

Rumors....what Far Righties have got.   All that they've got.


----------



## Conservative (Oct 31, 2012)

I'd like something more substantial than rumors.


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 31, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > And??????
> ...



I've been keeping up, but so far those allegations have not been substantiated.


----------



## Conservative (Oct 31, 2012)

debunked...

Thousands of Guardsmen are activated for Sandy | Foreign Policy


> There was enough speculation about Ham that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Marty Dempsey, traveling in Israel, also issued a statement: *"The speculation that General Carter Ham is departing Africa Command due to events in Benghazi, Libya on 11 September 2012 is absolutely false,"* the statement attributed to Dempsey said. *"General Ham's departure is part of a routine succession planning that has been going on since July. He continues to serve in AFRICOM with my complete confidence."*


----------



## Pheonixops (Oct 31, 2012)

Conservative said:


> debunked...
> 
> Thousands of Guardsmen are activated for Sandy | Foreign Policy
> 
> ...



Color me "surprised"!


----------



## Lakhota (Oct 31, 2012)

Christ, this board is getting worse than the National Enquirer.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Oct 31, 2012)

Pheonixops said:


> Wehrwolfen said:
> 
> 
> > Pheonixops said:
> ...




*Admiral Charles M. Gaouette was also relieved of command mid-deployment which is rare (understatement).  From the AP:

WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. Navy said Saturday it is replacing the admiral in command of an aircraft carrier strike group in the Middle East, pending the outcome of an internal investigation into undisclosed allegations of inappropriate judgment...

One theory is that GEN Ham asked the Stennis strike group for assistance with intelligence and military response in the face of a "do not assist" order and that Admiral Gaouette attempted to follow through on GEN Ham's requests for assistance for the men in Benghazi.  Another theory is that Gaouette was also part of a military coup.  I think that's ridiculous and not in the cards with our GO's (and you would see an entirely different reaction that just relief of command).

It's hard to say what is truth and what is fiction right now.  This is all speculation for the moment. And some of these rumors might have been started to ensure that the truth doesn't come out until after the election.

Are the two removals related?

Are Ham and Gaouette fall out from a cover up of Benghazi?*


----------



## francoHFW (Oct 31, 2012)

The Pub Propaganda Machine is a total disgrace. Pub dupes!! LOL


----------



## Conservative (Oct 31, 2012)

francoHFW said:


> The Pub Propaganda Machine is a total disgrace. Pub dupes!! LOL



Was the information I, a so-called Pub Dupe, posted... inaccurate?


----------



## geauxtohell (Nov 1, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Dinesh D'Souza  put together the only rational treatise on Obama that I've seen. Rejecting the bullshit of the birthers and those claiming Obama is a Muslim, D'Souza provides a well researched and factual look at Obama. That you trash him is just an example of your lack of rational thought.



Was that before or after he lied about banging a married chick while still being married to his wife while holding himself up as a moral compass?

Yeah, you should definately listen to him..............


----------



## g5000 (Nov 1, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > I just think that you 2016 and World Nut Daily folks are pretty fucked up individuals who want to obtain and retain power.
> ...



Ha!  Something we agree on.

I don't know why I watched that film, but I did.  I was expecting a looney tune birther flick, but it turned out to be a fascinating and fairly objective film.

I think subjective people will get subjective opinions out of it, but they are just writing their own prejudices onto the film.

While I do not agree entirely with all the conclusions D'Souza reached, the film is certainly one that is worth watching and reflecting on.  It provides an interesting perspective from which to observe Obama, and explains much.


.


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Nov 1, 2012)

Lindsey Graham on Fox now.. Stating this President should have closed the Consulate, having had NUMEROUS warnings, even from our own Ambassador begging for security and this President left our people for dead, targets. A total failure of Leadership, an Administration trying desperately to ride out the election clock, refusing to answer all questions posed by the Oversight Committee in direct violation of the Constitution which gives CONGRESS oversight so this kind of shit doesn't happen. I've said it all along.. "You can run but you can't hide." Obama will LOSE this election BIG and all of his dirty lies will surface.. Liberals prove they cannot be trusted to govern, PERIOD.. Their constituents are ZOMBIES who don't care about the truth any longer which makes them entirely useless and worthless in the critical balance of holding our leaders accountable.


----------



## g5000 (Nov 1, 2012)

There sure are a lot of standards being created over this matter.  It will be fun watching a Republican president trying to live up to them.

People inventing a complete fabrication the President was watching during the attack.  All kinds of armchair quarterbacking over what should and should not have been done before, during, and after the attack.

Good stuff.


.


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 1, 2012)

obama just gave a speech where he said that al quaeda was decimated.   He doesn't think of Libya as a failure but a success.


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Nov 1, 2012)

Katzndogz said:


> obama just gave a speech where he said that al quaeda was decimated.   He doesn't think of Libya as a failure but a success.



I saw it on Fox.. in the same breath he claimed to be bi-partisan. ROFLMAO!! Does this serial liar think people don't remmeber his infamous, "I WON?!"

Obama to GOP: &#8216;I Won&#8217; - Washington Wire - WSJ

The Community Organizer is going home .. where he belongs-- THUGVILLE - Chicagoland


----------



## Liberal (Nov 1, 2012)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > obama just gave a speech where he said that al quaeda was decimated.   He doesn't think of Libya as a failure but a success.
> ...



Come on.

Let's bet on it. 

I'll bet that Barack will be president # 45.

I am also willing to bet that you will tell us how you never liked Rmoney anyway.


----------



## tyroneweaver (Nov 1, 2012)

Liberal said:


> LadyGunSlinger said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...




an electorial college win can hardly be called a mandate


----------



## Liberal (Nov 1, 2012)

tyroneweaver said:


> Liberal said:
> 
> 
> > LadyGunSlinger said:
> ...



Oh, I am not saying that.

He will win both, the likely hood of him winning one and not the other is from 1% ~ 7%, depending on the CI calculated. The popular vote will be by a slim margin, the electoral vote will be the polar opposite, a landslide.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Nov 1, 2012)

_Former Libyan PM: Obama's 'Mission Accomplished' Moment Resulted in Benghazi​_


_*Former Libyan PM: Obama's 'Mission Accomplished' Moment Resulted in Benghazi


Did Barack Obama have a "Mission Accomplished" moment with dreadful consequences in Libya? Libya's former Prime Minister Mahmoud Jibril believes he did.

And just as many Democrats say Bush made a premature call after the sacking of Baghdad and the toppling of the Hussein regime, so too the former Libyan PM says Obama counted his eggs before they hatched. 
*_
*Jibril has "accused the United States and its NATO allies of high-tailing it out of [Libya] as soon as dictator Moammar Gadhafi was disposed a year ago." He says the quick departure created "a power vacuum" that has allowed radicals, like those who attacked the Benghazi consulate, to strengthen their numbers and flourish.
*


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Nov 1, 2012)

_Leaks, Lies, Libya...Lack of Leadership​_

*YouTube ^ 
October 27, 2012 
SpecialOpsSpeaks 



"Former Special Ops officers from four separate branches of the military have joined ranks for one specific purpose -- to remove Barack Obama from office."


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hMdCAGANiE&feature=youtu.be]Leaks, Lies, Libya...Lack of Leadership (Help us Promote This Video - Donate Today) - YouTube[/ame]*


(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...


----------



## Mr. H. (Nov 1, 2012)

A gross miscarriage of justice and an unconsciounable abuse of the Presidency.


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 1, 2012)

Four Americans died in Libya, but the intention was that ALL of them should die,   There were 30 people there, all condemned by obama to death.   Two brave men defied orders and went to get the consulate personnel out.   They got out all but two, one of which was Ambassador Stevens.    Had Woods and Dougherty been successful and escaped with the two embassy personnel, they would undoubtably have been court martialed for violating the president's direct orders.

Why was it so important to this royal regime that 30 people die?   What was the purpose?


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Nov 1, 2012)

Katzndogz said:


> Four Americans died in Libya, but the intention was that ALL of them should die,   There were 30 people there, all condemned by obama to death.   Two brave men defied orders and went to get the consulate personnel out.   They got out all but two, one of which was Ambassador Stevens.    Had Woods and Dougherty been successful and escaped with the two embassy personnel, they would undoubtably have been court martialed for violating the president's direct orders.
> 
> Why was it so important to this royal regime that 30 people die?   What was the purpose?



*Those questions are exactly what Obama and his cronies are desperately trying to avoid answering before the election. Then there's those on these boards in concert with Oblamer that pooh hoo the facts. Oblamer chose to go to sleep and go to Vegas rather than save those attacked in Ben Ghazi. Then Oblamer relieved an Admiral and a General on the spot because they refused to abandon Americans. They know Oblamer has sold out America for political and election reasons.*


----------



## tinydancer (Nov 1, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> _Leaks, Lies, Libya...Lack of Leadership​_
> 
> *YouTube ^
> October 27, 2012
> ...



Can you please get a transcript of the video? I can't see or hear it. And I'm out of rep, but thanks for putting this out there.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Nov 1, 2012)

_Former AG Mukasey: Obama Knows What Happened In Benghazi, He Owes The American People The Truth​_
_*Former AG Mukasey: Obama Knows What Happened In Benghazi, He Owes The American People The Truth | Flopping Aces
Ace @ Ace of Spades HQ:


Before the election.

There are three parts to this scandal: Before, During, and After.

Before, Stevens and others were begging for more security. Three weeks before the attack, Stevens warned that an attack was coming from the groups which did wind up attacking the base and killing him.

During, two brave former SEALs went to the consulates rescue and begged for air support to help them disperse attackers. Who would have run like cockroaches had a single jet fighter roared at them.

The Administration ordered possible rescuers to stand down.

After, the Administration lied repeatedly about every element of the attack. Obamas current stance is that he cannot answer questions about what he himself knew and what he himself ordered until an investigation is concluded.

He needs an investigation into his own actions and knowledge? I think Steve Hayes put it like this: Obama is currently claiming he wont know he knew until he finds an email telling him what he knew.

Obama knows what happened. He doesnt need an investigation to determine what he ordered or what he knew.

He only needs an investigation to discover what he can be provento have ordered or known.

Right now, hes just not answering questions. Someone with the Truth on his side does not have to avoid answers.

Read more:
Ace of Spades HQ*_


----------



## g5000 (Nov 1, 2012)




----------



## GuyPinestra (Nov 1, 2012)

g5000 said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITeuaqcpckc



Butthurt?

Strange, coming from you, I thought you had more integrity.

Too bad it wasn't one of YOUR sons in Benghazi, you'd feel differently, I believe...


----------



## TNHarley (Nov 1, 2012)

He owes the families of the victims a shitload. More than anyone could even comprehend. He had marines an hour away, 2 aircraft bases within an hour and gun-ships ready to go(least what I read). Watched the shit from the fuckin situation room. He is a scumbag piece of shit. If I was President them men might still be alive and that platoon of terrorists would be DEAD!


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Nov 1, 2012)

*Sorry TinyDancer, I searched for a transcript buy I was unable to find one. In the meantime I did find another video by Katherine Herridge. Unfortunately some transcripts are just not available.

http://www.youtuLeaks, Lies, Libya...Lack of Leadershipbe.com/watch?v=1dGd4_2mt9c*


----------



## tinydancer (Nov 1, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> *Sorry TinyDancer, I searched for a transcript buy I was unable to find one. In the meantime I did find another video by Katherine Herridge. Unfortunately some transcripts are just not available.
> 
> http://www.youtuLeaks, Lies, Libya...Lack of Leadershipbe.com/watch?v=1dGd4_2mt9c*



Appreciate you trying. Thanks.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 1, 2012)

Obama was on the grassy knoll and probably smoked on the Hindenberg too....


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Nov 1, 2012)

*So according to the Left wing detractors on this board, unless we have a video of Barack Oblamer handling a RPK and spraying ther Consulate nothing is true. Talk about total ignorant oblivion of the Progressive Left. It's obvious that Oblamer gave specific orders to abandon Stevens and the thirty odd people there. Why else would Oblamer relieve two high ranking officers from duty who questioned his decision? Hmm, I wonder if he'll have them hung for disobedience?*


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Nov 1, 2012)

_Catherine Herridge: State Department Culpable in Death of Ambassador & Three Americans (Video)​_


*by Jim Hoft
October 31, 2012


FOX News foreign policy analyst Catherine Herridge told Greta Van Susteren Wednesday, From what I see the State Department has culpability in the death of the US Ambassador and three Americans. The warnings to the State Department were: ** Specific  

View Video Link:  [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dGd4_2mt9c]Catherine Herridge: From What I See State Department Has Culpability in Death of Ambassador - YouTube[/ame]

Continue reading &#8594;
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/10/catherine-herridge-state-department-culpable-in-death-of-ambassador-three-americans-video/*


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Nov 1, 2012)

_Classified August Cable Signed By Ambassador Stevens Warned Benghazi Consulate Couldnt Withstand Coordinated Attack​_
*by Jim Hoft
October 31, 2012


A classified cable on August 15 warned the Obama Administration that the Benghazi consulate could not withstand a coordinated attack. The cable was signed by Ambassador Chris Stevens who was later murdered on 9-11. There were four previous Islamist attacks  



Continue reading &#8594;
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/10/classified-august-cable-warned-benghazi-consulate-couldnt-withstand-coordinated-attack/*


----------



## BlindBoo (Nov 1, 2012)

So you got anything from a *reliable news source *about Benghazi?


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Nov 1, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> So you got anything from a *reliable news source *about Benghazi?



Like what?  ABC?  NBC?  PMSNBC? CNN?  _PBS_?

Please the MSM is so in the tank for Obama it is pathetic.... spare us.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 1, 2012)

Cheddarmelon said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > Liberal said:
> ...



Video games are very lifelike in the GOP mind.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 1, 2012)

Vel said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Vel said:
> ...



You really want to start talking about Bin Laden again?  

Wow, is Romney this poor a candidate that you're _still _trying to make points with Benghazzi?


----------



## BlindBoo (Nov 1, 2012)

Soggy in NOLA said:


> BlindBoo said:
> 
> 
> > So you got anything from a *reliable news source *about Benghazi?
> ...



Ummm, I'll take that as a "No, we've only got Faux telling us what the truth is"!


----------



## emilynghiem (Nov 1, 2012)

Katzndogz said:


> Four Americans died in Libya, but the intention was that ALL of them should die,   There were 30 people there, all condemned by obama to death.   Two brave men defied orders and went to get the consulate personnel out.   They got out all but two, one of which was Ambassador Stevens.    Had Woods and Dougherty been successful and escaped with the two embassy personnel, they would undoubtably have been court martialed for violating the president's direct orders.
> 
> Why was it so important to this royal regime that 30 people die?   What was the purpose?



My understanding is somewhere the calculation was made that losing up to 30 people by letting the minimal forces handle it internally was better than taking the risk of sending in more reinforcements officially, and either something going wrong and failing, or more opposition being riled up and escalating this into a greater scale war.  I am guessing the people in charge decided it was better to "cap the losses," and deal with the aftermath through a formal investigation in peace time rather than try to resolve this in wartime.

I would not want to make that call either.

But in any case, the brave men and women who gave their lives and suffered for this attack, bought us time and freedom to proceed with our civil procedures instead of possibly inciting a war that could easily cost more and taken more years to resolve than this will.

I think we should give thanks and credit to them, and use our freedom to make peace in their honor, as they paid the ultimate sacrifice for us to have such privilege as Americans.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Nov 1, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> > BlindBoo said:
> ...



*Hmmm. Is Fox telling us what the truth is, or are they allowing the truth like 'sunshine' to disinfect the lies, deflections, and denials of the Left?  *


----------



## Oldstyle (Nov 1, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> > BlindBoo said:
> ...



The embarrassing thing for the "journalists" of the Main Stream Media is that Fox News is the only news outlet reporting on the murder of our Ambassador and the three others.  How can this be a "non-story" unless you're so in the tank for Barack Obama that you're willing to put blinders on and ignore what's right in front of your face?


----------



## BlindBoo (Nov 1, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> BlindBoo said:
> 
> 
> > Soggy in NOLA said:
> ...



Nope, Faux is not News.  They are at the forefront of the rabid rights echo chamber, designed to whip up emotional support for their cause based on half truths and lies.


----------



## Claudette (Nov 1, 2012)

Well those four dead Americans are no half truth. 

I do suppose that if the POTUS gave the order for them to be saved that order would have been carried out. 

Don't you??


----------



## BlindBoo (Nov 1, 2012)

Oldstyle said:


> BlindBoo said:
> 
> 
> > Soggy in NOLA said:
> ...



Funny I never listen to or watch what they call news on Faux and I've known about the 4 Americans killed in a terrorist attack in Benghazi since the day it happened?  You must mean that since the other networks aren't allowing monday morning quaterbacks to endlessly speculate 24/7 about how badly the Obama administration handled the attack and aftermath then yeah I'm sure they're sooooo embarrassed.


----------



## Claudette (Nov 1, 2012)

Sure you  know about it. The LSM broadcasted it till news of the Administrations less than truthfull claims came out. 

Then it kinda, sorta dried up on every station except FOX. 

Wonder why that is??


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Nov 1, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Obama was on the grassy knoll and probably smoked on the Hindenberg too....



*Very funny, very funny..... I heard that Obama's family was responsible for selling the first African slaves to the English to be shipped to America too.*


----------



## Moonglow (Nov 1, 2012)

jwoodie said:


> 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> 
> 2.  It demonstrates the unconscionable elevation of politics over protection of American citizens.
> 
> ...



Bush manged to get re-elected with his failure to protect US citizens on 9/11/2001
Bush managed to get re-elected with extensive mismanagement of the war on terror to invade a nation under false pretense, and cost the US taxpayers trillions and thousands of deaths of US soldiers, and you talk about partisan support of a democrat?


----------



## Moonglow (Nov 1, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Obama was on the grassy knoll and probably smoked on the Hindenberg too....
> ...



Who is worse the sellers, or the buyers?


----------



## BlindBoo (Nov 1, 2012)

Claudette said:


> Well those four dead Americans are no half truth.
> 
> I do suppose that if the POTUS gave the order for them to be saved that order would have been carried out.
> 
> Don't you??



As reported on every network.  What is missing from the reputable ones are the half-bake lies like we hear from you Faux viewers.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Nov 1, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> Oldstyle said:
> 
> 
> > BlindBoo said:
> ...



*Oh, you mean initially questioning the reasons for the attack is Monday morning quarterbacking, especially when your "Dear One" can't keep the lie together? First it was a mob riot for nearly a week, then the partial truth that it was a coordinated attack by al-Qaeda terrorist with heavy machine guns, mortars and RPG's. Now through "Monday Morning" investigation we are finding that Obama and company were aware of the impending attack told to them by  one of the victims of the attack. So according to you that August confrence was the decision point that the lives of the thirty people was not worth beefing up the security with Marines and in fact the decision was made to reduce whatever security assets they had further. Good logic. Sounds more like a decision Hitler would have made when his troops were surrounded*


----------



## Murf76 (Nov 1, 2012)

emilynghiem said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Four Americans died in Libya, but the intention was that ALL of them should die,   There were 30 people there, all condemned by obama to death.   Two brave men defied orders and went to get the consulate personnel out.   They got out all but two, one of which was Ambassador Stevens.    Had Woods and Dougherty been successful and escaped with the two embassy personnel, they would undoubtably have been court martialed for violating the president's direct orders.
> ...



Making that call is Obama's JOB.  That's the job he's running for again.  He's spent nearly two billion in two elections to get it.  And.... he made the wrong call.

This wasn't a situation where a war would be started that didn't already exist.  The cable Catherine Herridge reported on yesterday says that there are terrorist strongholds all over eastern Libya and gaining strength.  This was discussed almost a month before the 9/11 attack.  In order to prevent Libya from sliding into a terrorist state post-revolution, the local populace has to have the courage to stand up to these terrorists.  What Obama did was to _discourage_ those good citizens who don't want to be living under the thumbs of jihadist zealotry.   Psychologically, even a high-speed flyover would've proved that the good guys can get back-up in a matter of hours.  It likely would've broken off the attack as well.

All Obama accomplished was to encourage more violence and tumult.


----------



## Dante (Nov 1, 2012)

tinydancer said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



that's how this is being spun?



The CIA and Defense Dept, and everyone else is in on it?

Conspiracy thread


----------



## Dante (Nov 1, 2012)

Dante said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > *Why Benghazi Doesn't Matter To Most Americans*
> ...



jesus christ!  The wingnuts are saying the Admin lied so they wouldn't look weak on terrorism?


hello?


----------



## catzmeow (Nov 1, 2012)

CIA rushed to save diplomats as Libya attack was underway - The Washington Post



> The CIA rushed security operatives to an American diplomatic compound in Libya within 25 minutes after it had come under attack and played a more central role in the effort to fend off a night-long siege than has been publicly acknowledged, U.S. intelligence officials said Thursday.
> 
> The agency mobilized the evacuation effort, took control of an unarmed U.S. military drone to map possible escape routes, dispatched an emergency security team from Tripoli, the capital, and chartered aircraft that ultimately carried surviving U.S. personnel to safety on Sept. 12, U.S. officials said.


----------



## Freewill (Nov 1, 2012)

Nevadas Biggest Paper: Obama 'Unworthy Commander-in-Chief' After Benghazi

Nevadas largest newspaper blasted President Barack Obama in a blistering editorial on Thursday about the Benghazi attacks in which four Americans died, calling him an unworthy commander-in-chief.

Obama, who holds a small lead in Nevada, which has six electoral votes, was taken to task by the Las Vegas Review-Journal for his handling of the Benghazi, Libya attacks in an editorial headlined, Benghazi blunder: Obama unworthy commander-in-chief.

Read more on Newsmax.com: Nevadas Biggest Paper: Obama 'Unworthy Commander-in-Chief' After Benghazi 
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!


----------



## daveman (Nov 1, 2012)

Pheonixops said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Pheonixops said:
> ...


Better people discuss this issue than have it swept under the rug to avoid the charge of incompetence.


Pheonixops said:


> You don't know if that General was relieved from duty because he didn't act any more than it was because he wanted to act and didn't follow orders from his chain of command. The President was friends with the Ambassador, I think that the incident needs to be investigated by a bi-partisan panel. I think and know that someone DID drop the ball on this one.


I believe people who were there over this lying White House.


Pheonixops said:


> If you people want to give the President all of the 'credit' for this incident, it's pretty hypocritical of you to not want to give him the 'credit' and distance him away from getting OBL.


And the reverse holds true for you.

Unless that's different.  Somehow.


----------



## catzmeow (Nov 1, 2012)

Timeline of events, comments surrounding attack that killed 4 Americans in Benghazi, Libya - The Washington Post

A few related stories:

CIA denies calling off operatives on the ground:
CIA Denies Calling Off Backup in Benghazi - Global - The Atlantic Wire

CIA rushed to save diplomats on the ground in Benghazi:
CIA rushed to save diplomats as Libya attack was underway - The Washington Post


----------



## daveman (Nov 1, 2012)

Pheonixops said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > geauxtohell said:
> ...


At least we don't believe it was about a years-old YouTube video.  Talk about fantasy...


----------



## Serioususername (Nov 1, 2012)

daveman said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



It's not like ALL OVER the area, people were getting all SUPER mad about that same years-old youtube video. I mean, if THAT happened, it'd almost be like such a story in the same region would be, plausible or something.


----------



## daveman (Nov 1, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Vel said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


As I believe I've already said, there are no secondary explosions from Vulcan rounds.  They're kinetic-kill, not explosive.

There would be secondaries had they been used to take out the mortar that killed Woods.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Nov 1, 2012)

Sources: Key task force not convened during Benghazi consulate attack 
CBS ^ 

Sources: Key task force not convened during Benghazi consulate attack - CBS News



> CBS News has learned that during the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Obama Administration did not convene its top interagency counterterrorism resource: the Counterterrorism Security Group, (CSG).
> 
> "The CSG is the one group that's supposed to know what resources every agency has. They know of multiple options and have the ability to coordinate counterterrorism assets across all the agencies," a high-ranking government official told CBS News. "They were not allowed to do their job. They were not called upon."



Obama didn't do shit to help our men. Obama has lied and flip floped. He needs to go.


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Nov 1, 2012)

_Ben Ghazi: The Drip-Drip-Drip​_

*By:  -Jake Tapper, Mary Bruce, Devin Dwyer and Dana Hughes
The Benghazi Drip-Drip-Drip - ABC News


[snip]
The State Departments comment to Fox: An independent board is conducting a thorough review of the assault on our post in Benghazi. Once we have the boards comprehensive account of what happened, findings and recommendations, we can fully address these matters.

It was the exact same statement given to ABC News earlier in the month about a different revelation.

This afternoon, journalists Harald Doornbos and Jenan Moussa in Foreign Policy Magazine reported that when they arrived at the compound in Benghazi on October 26 they found several ash-strewn documents beneath rubble in the looted Tactical Operations Center, one of the four main buildings of the partially destroyed compound. Some of the documents  such as an email from Stevens to his political officer in Benghazi and a flight itinerary sent to Sean Smith, a U.S. diplomat slain in the attack  are clearly marked as State Department correspondence. Others are unsigned printouts of messages to local and national Libyan authorities. The two unsigned draft letters are both dated Sept. 11 and express strong fears about the security situation at the compound on what would turn out to be a tragic day. They also indicate that Stevens and his team had officially requested additional security at the Benghazi compound for his visit  and that they apparently did not feel it was being provided.

A Sept. 11 missive to the head of the Libyan Ministry of Foreign Affairs notes that on that morning, one of our diligent guards made a troubling report. Near our main gate, a member of the police force was seen in the upper level of a building across from our compound. It is reported that this person was photographing the inside of the U.S. special mission and furthermore that this person was part of the police unit sent to protect the mission. The police car stationed where this event occurred was number 322.

On Air Force One today, White House press secretary Jay Carney was asked by ABC News how closely the President is reading and following the media reports about what went wrong in Benghazi.

Is he engaged in the investigation and receiving updates on the investigation, or is he waiting until its complete? ABC News Devin Dwyer asked.

Carney noted that since the investigations are being conducted by both the FBI and the Accountability Review Board the president himself is not participating in the investigation. He is anticipating results that show us exactly what happened, who was responsible and what lessons we can learn from it in terms of how we ensure that it never happens again.

The White House press secretary  who has not held a full-fledged briefing with the White House press corps since October 12  said that the president expects the investigations to be rigorous. He is extremely focused on making sure that we find exactly what happened and who was responsible, and tracking down those who were responsible and bringing them to justice.*


----------



## daveman (Nov 1, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Vel said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


There is no rational way that Benghazi cannot be considered a failure in leadership.

But of course, Obama supporters aren't that rational.


----------



## Serioususername (Nov 1, 2012)

daveman said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Vel said:
> ...



The point about the Gau-12 is the inherent inaccuracy, as shown in the video with rounds peppering in the general vicinity. Also, you're wrong on the explosion part- it can fire HEI and API. Pretty sure you can see the little explosions in the videos.


----------



## Vel (Nov 1, 2012)

Oh no.. the some of the MSM is figuring out that their after election credibility is on the line and they must report this story. I doubt CBS wants their anonymous source to go to another network and tell them that CBS knew and sat on the story.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Nov 1, 2012)

Obama told the military to stand down and watched.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Nov 1, 2012)

More details in the CBS article. Washington. A MUST READ article.

&#8220;Another senior counter terrorism official says a hostage rescue team was alternately asked to get ready and then stand down throughout the night, as officials seemed unable to make up their minds.&#8221;

RE: AFICOM: &#8220;Forces were positioned after the fact but not much good to those that needed it,&#8221; the military source told CBS News.


----------



## daveman (Nov 1, 2012)

Serioususername said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Pheonixops said:
> ...


And yet the emails show the video had nothing to do with it.  You know, the emails that the White House and the State Department had seen.


----------



## daveman (Nov 1, 2012)

Serioususername said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


I stand corrected.


----------



## Serioususername (Nov 1, 2012)

daveman said:


> Serioususername said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



The emails weren't their sole source of intelligence dude. Parts of the information they provided in those very emails were incorrect in themselves- they aren't some infallible source of information on what happened.


----------



## daveman (Nov 1, 2012)

Serioususername said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Serioususername said:
> ...


Yeah, I'm gonna have to defer to the people who were actually there, not the people desperate to spin the results to make their guy look good.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Nov 1, 2012)

How many times does Obama need to spin and lie for you to be turned off? Damn.


----------



## Mr. H. (Nov 1, 2012)

Unable to make up their minds. God almighty. 

Front Page News relegated to message boards. 

Pathetic.


----------



## chesswarsnow (Nov 1, 2012)

Sorry bout that,




jwoodie said:


> 1.  It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.
> 
> 2.  It demonstrates the unconscionable elevation of politics over protection of American citizens.
> 
> ...






1. Pretty much what I've been saying only a little better.
2. Well said.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Nov 1, 2012)

_CBS News: Obama Never Convened Counterterrorism Task Force During Benghazi Terror Attack​_



_You know, because he decimated al-Qaeda.​_ 

*Via CBS News:
CBS News: Obama Never Convened Counterterrorism Task Force During Benghazi Terror Attack | Weasel Zippers

CBS News has learned that during the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Obama Administration did not convene its top interagency counterterrorism resource: the Counterterrorism Security Group, (CSG).

The CSG is the one group thats supposed to know what resources every agency has. They know of multiple options and have the ability to coordinate counterterrorism assets across all the agencies, a high-ranking government official told CBS News. They were not allowed to do their job. They were not called upon.

Counterterrorism sources and internal emails reviewed by CBS News express frustration that key responders were ready to deploy, but were not called upon to help in the attack.

Another senior counter terrorism official says a hostage rescue team was alternately asked to get ready and then stand down throughout the night, as officials seemed unable to make up their minds.

A third potential responder from a counter-terror force stationed in Europe says components of AFICOM  the militarys Africa Command based in Stuttgart, Germany  were working on course of action during the assault. But no plan was put to use

The response process was isolated at the most senior level, says an official referring to top officials in the executive branch. My fellow counterterrorism professionals and I (were) not consulted.

Keep reading
Sources: Key task force not convened during Benghazi consulate attack - CBS News*


----------



## Vel (Nov 1, 2012)

When you read the article it's apparent that no one had a clue what to do. This is why we need a leader in the Whitehouse.


----------



## Clementine (Nov 2, 2012)

Vel said:


> When you read the article it's apparent that no one had a clue what to do. This is why we need a leader in the Whitehouse.



Obama is way too supportive of the radical Muslims.   He has yet to openly condemn them.


----------



## skye (Nov 2, 2012)

Clementine said:


> Vel said:
> 
> 
> > When you read the article it's apparent that no one had a clue what to do. This is why we need a leader in the Whitehouse.
> ...




He is a radical Muslim at heart,  always apologizing.... I want to vomit!!!


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

skye said:


> Clementine said:
> 
> 
> > Vel said:
> ...



great. smell of your vomit to mix with your smelly twat


----------



## copsnrobbers (Nov 2, 2012)

It's been my opinion all along Obama is a Communist Muslim Radical. 
He's not just a liberal like many of you would hope. Don't support him. 
*
Vote him out. He's Bad for the World.*


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Barack Hussein Obama II, President of the United States of America​


----------



## Claudette (Nov 2, 2012)

Wehrwolfen said:


> BlindBoo said:
> 
> 
> > Oldstyle said:
> ...



Good post and right on. 

Barry sent his minions out with that video lie and of course its come back to bit him in the ass. 

Hell. His State Department received requests for additional security way before the attack. Those requests were denied. One has to wonder about why they were denied. 

If an embassy asked for additional security you can bet its not done on a whim. They must feel they need it. Seems the State Department is run by idiots. 

I'm sure by now Barry is wishing he'd given the order to save those men.


----------



## Capitalist (Nov 2, 2012)

*The Butcher Of Benghazi Wants To Keep The Choppers and Jets *

 			 				By: Skook 



                                                               Watching men die, while locked in a state of  indecision or having dubious motives that prevent you from sending in  available assets that could have saved these men, is one of the most  heinous acts of cowardice and malfeasance ever perpetrated by a sitting  American President.  For seven hours, the Obama Administration sat by  and watched brave Americans fight for their very lives, but if the  administration had its way, the death toll would be thirty instead of  four.  Adding to our disgrace is the fact that within 500 miles, there  were several sources of help that could have changed the situation and  saved some, if not all the Americans who were killed.
Continue reading &#8594;


----------



## Capitalist (Nov 2, 2012)

*Americas Shame Continues, The Butcher of Benhgazi Dont Know Nothing *

 			 				By: Skook 



 *Four Senators out of one hundred have asked  the president to explain why we and our military have been humiliated by  terrorists and why he let four American heroes be butchered.*
Continue reading &#8594;


----------



## Sallow (Nov 2, 2012)

"The Butcher of Benghazi", huh?

Hope you guys aren't still complaining about partisanship.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 2, 2012)

Statists love their dictators faults and all


----------



## LogikAndReazon (Nov 2, 2012)

Surely much more discussion, analysis, debate and input from the international "community" was needed before such hasty action could be taken..............

These spontaneous uprisings due to internet videos could not have been forseen.........

Obama and the State Dept should not be held accountable for this "difficult" and unfortunate situation

Lets just forget about it, learn from this and move FORWARD


----------



## Trajan (Nov 2, 2012)

I started a new thread in part because the latest line of smoke screens being set to cover for the Admin. are the usual misdirection,  Fox News is reporting these 'leaks' and are making it up or taking license with the evidence they have been shown etc.


CBS by the way has had several other 'scoops' ala Benghazi, but hey, Fox is always a good whipping post eh? 



CBS News/ November 1, 2012, 6:02 PM
Sources: Key task force not convened during Benghazi consulate attack


_CBS News has learned that during the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Obama Administration did not convene its top interagency counterterrorism resource: the Counterterrorism Security Group, (CSG). _

_*    &#8220;The [Counterterrorism Security Group] is the one group that&#8217;s supposed to know what resources every agency has. They know of multiple options and have the ability to coordinate counterterrorism assets across all the agencies,&#8221; a high-ranking government official told CBS News. &#8220;They were not allowed to do their job. They were not called upon.&#8221;&#8230;*_

_Counterterrorism sources and internal emails reviewed by CBS News express frustration that key responders were ready to deploy, but were not called upon to help in the attack&#8230;

    Another senior counter terrorism official says a hostage rescue team was alternately asked to get ready and then stand down throughout the night, as officials seemed unable to make up their minds.

    A third potential responder from a counter-terror force stationed in Europe says components of AFICOM &#8212; the military&#8217;s Africa Command based in Stuttgart, Germany &#8212; were working on course of action during the assault. But no plan was put to use&#8230;

    &#8220;The response process was isolated at the most senior level,&#8221; says an official referring to top officials in the executive branch. &#8220;My fellow counterterrorism professionals and I (were) not consulted.&#8221;
_
more at-
Sources: Key task force not convened during Benghazi consulate attack - CBS News



Please read the whole article, and note-  that a hostage rescue team was asked to get ready and then stand down.

so, the new question,  putting aside who told Rice to say what she said and why the president continued to blame the video is;


why did they not convene?


----------



## Claudette (Nov 2, 2012)

logikandreazon said:


> surely much more discussion, analysis, debate and input from the international "community" was needed before such hasty action could be taken..............
> 
> These spontaneous uprisings due to internet videos could not have been forseen.........
> 
> ...



lmao


----------



## Mr. H. (Nov 2, 2012)

Yet another "account"...

New Benghazi Account Bolsters CIA - Yahoo! News


----------



## Claudette (Nov 2, 2012)

Butcher??

Nah. Just a guy who let 4 brave men die.


----------



## longknife (Nov 2, 2012)

by directorblue at Doug Ross @ Journal: TWIN TIMELINE: What was happening in Benghazi and Washington







Last night I heard Newt Gingrich ask for a twin timeline to help illustrate what was happening in Benghazi and in Washington. Newt's wish is my command:


Some interesting observations:

 Hillary Clinton's aspirations for higher office are toast: despite numerous requests for additional security, the State Department adamantly refused each time -- for, what would seem, purely political reasons. Those partisan games cost four Americans their lives.

 The "Internet video" tale was an egregious lie foisted upon the American public by an administration committed to additional spiking of the Bin Laden football -- again, for purely political reasons.

 Methinks any effort to distribute the Bin Laden movie/Obama infomercial before the election will be extremely distasteful for most American.

What are your thoughts?


----------



## Mr. H. (Nov 2, 2012)

Let's just forget about the last 3-1/2 years and give him another 4.


----------



## longknife (Nov 2, 2012)

by Herschel Smith  The Captain's Journal » So What Were The Assets Available For Benghazi? 

Weekly Standard has been busy covering the Benghazi scandal.* I had earlier remarked that:

The notion that we dont send our forces into harms way without knowing whats going on is patently absurd and false.* Simply said, its a lie.* We deploy Army Rangers to take control of air fields and landing zones in potentially hostile environments, for which we do not know all of the desired information; we deploy Marine infantry into situations of potentially unknown threats all of the time all over the globe; each and every time a patrol left the outpost at the Korengal in Afghanistan, they were deploying into potentially deadly situations without specific and detailed knowledge of the situation.

A reader at Weekly Standard writes in with the following:

 one can find in Marine Corps Doctrinal Publication 1: Warfighting the following passage on pages 86 and 87:

We must have the moral courage to make tough decisions in the face of uncertaintyand to accept full responsibility for those decisionswhen the natural inclination would be to postpone the decision pending more complete information. *To delay action in an emergency because of incomplete information shows a lack of moral courage. *We do not want to make rash decisions, but we must not squander opportunities while trying to gain more information. *Finally, since all decisions must be made in the face of uncertainty and since every situation is unique, there is no perfect solution to any battlefield problem. *Therefore, we should not agonize over one.

Just so, and good find, that one.* But on another front, Bill Kristol covers the various finger pointing within the administration, just as do I.* But then there is this pregnant statement along with the link.

In response perhaps to the questions raised by Petraeus and Panetta, there now appears to be an attempt by some defense officials to suggest there really wasnt much more that could have been done on September 11, given limitations on the assets and capabilities available.

The link takes you to an article at AEI by Paul Wolfowitz.* Now comes the interesting part.* I need to cite at length.

From what I can determine from talking with someone who has spoken directly with key general officers and others involved in the US response to the Benghazi attacks, it would appear that  contrary to Panettas basic principle  the US did almost everything possible to protect our people once the attacks had started, though not in advance:

The Consulate was overrun in a matter of minutes, before any help was possible.
A team that appears to have been CIA personnel deployed quickly (and bravely) from the Annex to the Consulate and rescued everyone they found alive there. (Its not clear whether Ambassador Stevens had already been taken by Libyans to the hospital or whether they simply failed to find him.)

A mainly CIA response force deployed quickly from Tripoli to reinforce the Annex and facilitate its successful evacuation.

Decision makers in Washington appear to have been leaning forward, as they should have been. The militarys most capable rescue force, based on the East Coast, was deployed immediately (something that is very rarely done), but  given the distances involved  arrived at Sigonella only after the crisis was over.

Also, the* European command (EUCOM) deployed its number one counter terrorism force, which was training in central Europe, as quickly as possible, but it arrived in Sigonella after the evacuation of the Annex was complete.

Other special forces deployed to Sigonella but arrived on the 12th after it was too late to make a difference in Benghazi.

There was no AC-130 gunship in the region.

The only drone available in Libya was an unarmed surveillance drone which was quickly moved from Darna to Benghazi, but the field of view of these drones is limited and, in any case, this one was not armed.

The only other assets immediately available were F-16 fighter jets based at Aviano, Italy. These aircraft might have reached Benghazi while the fight at the Annex was still going on, but they would have had difficulty pinpointing hostile mortar positions or distinguishing between friendly and hostile militias in the midst of a confused firefight in a densely populated residential area where there would have been a high likelihood of civilian casualties. While two more Americans were tragically killed by a mortar strike on the Annex, its not clear that deploying F-16s would have prevented that. In any case, the decision not to do so was made by the tactical commander, General Ham, as it should have been.

Lets leave aside my personal feelings towards Wolfowitz (he helped to begin Operation Iraqi Freedom with too few men to tamp down the inevitable insurgency, thus leading to Phase II and III of OIF).* I dont have much fondness for him.

But back to what he said, this is a remarkable claim.* According to this claim, the Africa command (based in Europe) had no assets to which it could turn.* None.* Contrary to reports (that I have cited), there were no Delta operators at Sigonella.* There was no AC-130, there wasnt even Marine Force Recon, again, contrary to published reports that I have cited.

They were apparently all in the field, deployed across Africa.* No one was available.* There were no air assets available to assist the poor souls at Benghazi.* Not even an MP or cook could have responded from Sigonella.* The base (the American side of it, anyway) was a ghost town.* The closest asset was  the Eastern coast of the United States.
I dont believe it.* Im not saying that I dont believe Wolfowitz, but I dont believe his sources.* How the hell does one run Africa command with no assets at your disposal?* Besides, this answer is too easy to produce and then move on after the furor dies down.
This leads me to the final point.* There are so many reports  many of them false by design  that the picture is worse by the day.* What happened at Benghazi happened.* The horrible picture developing before our eyes is one of obfuscation, dishonesty, diversion, lies and excuses.

Heres a note to the DoD and State Department.* Listen very carefully.* Wolfowitz says it would appear.* Thats not even nearly good enough.* We wont accept appearances, or anonymous sources.* There is a paper trail of deployments, locations, arming orders, force sizes, and so on and so forth.* There is yet another paper trail of orders, requests, directives and other communications that fateful night.

We wont stop until it is all public and assessed by all of us.* We will get it, eventually.* We will all see it.* We will know who did what, who said what, what assets were where, who lied, who equivocated, and who came clean.* We will name names.

The players who have any integrity left should come clean now and spill everything.* It will go better for everyone in the long run.* But it wont change the facts.* And the facts will be found out.* Thats our promise.

UPDATE #1: Thanks to Glenn Reynolds for the attention.

UPDATE #2: It occurs to me from the comments and from other remarks that I have seen elsewhere that we need to deal with one objection up front, i.e., that there wasnt time before the fire fight was over to transport assets to Benghazi to assist.* This is an illegitimate objection, since we cannot assume that the decision-makers at that time know what we know now (that is, that the fight would last about a half day).* For all they knew, the fight would have lasted for days on end, with Americans holed up in buildings awaiting relief.* Ex post facto objections like this have no legs.* They constitute excuses, but they dont explain the decision-making at the time.


----------



## Vel (Nov 2, 2012)

Obama supporters don't want to know.


----------



## blastoff (Nov 2, 2012)

Barry wants everyone to wait until the investigation is complete so we will know exactly what happened. 

Yet, without any investigation, he and his stooges repeatedly blamed it on the video.  

It's "the police acted stupidly" redux.


----------



## Claudette (Nov 2, 2012)

Nope. And FOX lies.


----------



## Mr. H. (Nov 2, 2012)

Let's just forget about this and move forward.


----------



## longknife (Nov 2, 2012)

by Herschel Smith @ The Captain's Journal » Benghazi Inconsistencies 

President Obama didnt deny assistance to the poor souls at Benghazi, or so says President Obama.

    The White House on Saturday flatly denied that President Barack Obama withheld requests for help from the besieged American compound in Benghazi, Libya, as it came under on attack by suspected terrorists on September 11th.

    Neither the president nor anyone in the White House denied any requests for assistance in Benghazi, National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor told Yahoo News by email.

On the other hand, the CIA didnt tell anyone not to help the poor souls in Benghazi either.

    Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.

The Department of Defense also isnt responsible.

    Following a pair of denials by the CIA and the National Security Council to a Fox News story published Friday, the Pentagon has come under scrutiny for its response to the assault on the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya. However, in a statement to The Atlantic Wire, a senior defense official says the Pentagon never rejected requests for military intervention in Benghazi. Not only that, the official said no such requests were ever made.

    The Pentagon took action by moving personnel and assets in the region shortly after it learned of the attack on the Benghazi consulate, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity. There was no request made for military intervention in Benghazi. To be successful, such an operation, if requested, would have required solid information about what was happening on the ground. Such clarity just wasnt available as the attack was unfolding.

Full blog at link.


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Nov 2, 2012)

Fox is about to report some new information that came in that has Senator McCain ticked off..


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> that's how this is being spun?



Spun? 

No, those are the facts. Rather than Al Qaeda being "on their heels" as Obama claimed, they launched a well planned and coordinated terrorist attack on 9/11. Obama, more concerned with reelection than the safety and security of the United State, responded by lying and having his staff lie, floating a wild tale of obscure YouTube videos and spontaneous protests.

But you knew this, and prefer to lie yourself.

Hey, Obama is too important for things like truth and competency to be considered.

Hack.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 2, 2012)

skye said:


> He is a radical Muslim at heart,  always apologizing.... I want to vomit!!!



He's an arrogant, prancing pansy. Obama cares only about appearance and was concerned ONLY with how this would affect his campaign. He flounced around unable to make a decision, because there is nothing OTHER than image to our Queen.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

Hey 

the small crowds loved him in Vegas,...


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 2, 2012)

catzmeow said:


> Timeline of events, comments surrounding attack that killed 4 Americans in Benghazi, Libya - The Washington Post
> 
> A few related stories:
> 
> ...




Damn, the Obama press is running cover?

Who woodathunkit.

Say, what happens if the DNC press starts questioning?

{CBS News has learned that during the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Obama Administration did not convene its top interagency counterterrorism resource: the Counterterrorism Security Group, (CSG).

"The CSG is the one group that's supposed to know what resources every agency has. They know of multiple options and have the ability to coordinate counterterrorism assets across all the agencies," a high-ranking government official told CBS News. "They were not allowed to do their job. They were not called upon."

Information shared with CBS News from top counterterrorism sources in the government and military reveal keen frustration over the U.S. response on Sept. 11, the night Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed in a coordinated attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya.

The circumstances of the attack, including the intelligence and security situation there, will be the subject of a Senate Intelligence Committee closed hearing on Nov. 15, with additional hearings to follow.

*Counterterrorism sources and internal emails reviewed by CBS News express frustration that key responders were ready to deploy, but were not called upon to help in the attack.*}

Sources: Key task force not convened during Benghazi consulate attack - CBS News

Hey Catzshit, you just stick with chanting "Ohhh Bahhh Bahhh Mahhh," leave the thinking to those of us with triple digit IQ's.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

So sad how the Papa Obama administration has
lied to the US public


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

* So What Were The Assets Available For Benghazi?*

A jet to Vegas


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 2, 2012)

If obama could come up with some plausible reason that he didn't know, someone could twist and reconfigure that he was too involved in his narrative and reelection.  That's not the case.   The real events were that he did know, he knew for months.   This was deliberate.   He could have gotten those people out of there.   He could have sent rescue during that 7 hour battle.   But he didn't.  Because he had a reason for sacrificing 30 American lives.


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 2, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > He is a radical Muslim at heart,  always apologizing.... I want to vomit!!!
> ...



All Hail obama.

Or is that Heil obama?


Crowd Chants 'Hail Obama' - Barack Obama - Fox Nation


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 2, 2012)

The only way to find out what really happened is to have an investigation with obama out of the white house and his entire regime out of office.


----------



## Vel (Nov 2, 2012)

The Obama WhiteHouse did NOTHING! Special forces were two hours away. 

Benghazi consulate warned 3 hours before attack of militia gathering arms
POSTED AT 10:41 AM ON NOVEMBER 2, 2012 BY ED MORRISSEY

Remember how the White House insisted for more than a week that there was no evidence that the sacking of the Benghazi consulate was anything more than a spontaneous demonstration over a two-month-old YouTube video that spun out of control? * Fox News this morning reports that cables from the consulate itself made clear that they expected an attack from local militia groups in the hours before the terrorist attack that claimed the lives of four Americans, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens*. They also told the State Department that they had reason to believe their local security was gathering intel for the attack:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=&v=7iC7ezp53EY#]Fox News On Obama Admin Not Sending Interagency Rescue Force To Benghazi - YouTube[/ame]!

Fox News: Benghazi consulate warned 3 hours before attack of militia gathering arms « Hot Air


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 2, 2012)

Katzndogz said:


> The only way to find out what really happened is to have an investigation with obama out of the white house and his entire regime out of office.



We can start on Jan 21, 2013.


----------



## jasonnfree (Nov 2, 2012)

Capitalist said:


> *The Butcher Of Benghazi Wants To Keep The Choppers and Jets *
> 
> By: Skook
> 
> ...



You guys keep looking for Obama's Waterloo.    After the Cheney/Bush WMD's fiasco and hundreds of thousands of dead?  "The butcher of Benghazi" ???  How pathetic. Turn off fox news and get a hobby you clowns.


----------



## jasonnfree (Nov 2, 2012)

Capitalist said:


> *The Butcher Of Benghazi Wants To Keep The Choppers and Jets *
> 
> By: Skook
> 
> ...



is that your face?  It looks like a typical republican.  Red faced and angry over everthing.  Can't enjoy life.  Republicans. The party of the afraid and the angry.


----------



## Dreamy (Nov 2, 2012)

blastoff said:


> Barry wants everyone to wait until the investigation is complete so we will know exactly what happened.
> 
> Yet, without any investigation, he and his stooges repeatedly blamed it on the video.
> 
> It's "the police acted stupidly" redux.



There is an election to win. If he becomes a lame duck perhaps he will be more forthcoming....or perhaps not. Legacy and all. lol


----------



## occupied (Nov 2, 2012)

Butcher of Benghazi? OK the stupid has officially reached critical mass. If any of you republicans had an ounce of pride you would run away from such ridiculously overblown rhetoric.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

Indeed

before you know it
People will be saying Romney killed a women with cancer


----------



## blastoff (Nov 2, 2012)

occupied said:


> Butcher of Benghazi? OK the stupid has officially reached critical mass. If any of you republicans had an ounce of pride you would run away from such ridiculously overblown rhetoric.



Yeah, in this regard we should all take lessons from you friggin' lefties.


----------



## occupied (Nov 2, 2012)

blastoff said:


> occupied said:
> 
> 
> > Butcher of Benghazi? OK the stupid has officially reached critical mass. If any of you republicans had an ounce of pride you would run away from such ridiculously overblown rhetoric.
> ...



Well there's two votes for "not ridiculous enough" not an ounce of pride anywhere in your hateful bloated bodies.


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

*Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*

Will Ben Ghazzi still rule USMB after Nov 6th?


----------



## The Infidel (Nov 2, 2012)

No...& who the fuck is Ben Ghazi?


----------



## blackhawk (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> 
> Will Ben Ghazzi still rule USMB after Nov 6th?



I don't know about Ben Ghazzi but I for one will still want answers about what happened in Benghazi.


----------



## PredFan (Nov 2, 2012)

Yes.


----------



## occupied (Nov 2, 2012)

Good question, the answer is no, it will go into the memory hole the second they realize that it has no further value to their war on the president.


----------



## Rocko (Nov 2, 2012)

occupied said:


> Good question, the answer is no, it will go into the memory hole the second they realize that it has no further value to their war on the president.



Wrong. 

If Obama does get re-elected, then our efforts will be focused on impeaching him.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> 
> Will Ben Ghazzi still rule USMB after Nov 6th?



It should.  We had 4 americans die while people in positions of power refused to give orders *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*"]told the military to stand down

Whomever made that decision to tell the military, on 3 seperate occasions between 930pm when the attacks started and early am hours when it ended to stand down needs to be fired.


----------



## blackhawk (Nov 2, 2012)

On a side note will the left wingers still care about women's reproductive rights on November 7th or will that be forgotten as they will no longer need to manufacture a war on women?


----------



## PredFan (Nov 2, 2012)

Rocko said:


> occupied said:
> 
> 
> > Good question, the answer is no, it will go into the memory hole the second they realize that it has no further value to their war on the president.
> ...



Maybe Dante and Occupied think Obama's going to lose?

Hope they are right then.


----------



## occupied (Nov 2, 2012)

Rocko said:


> occupied said:
> 
> 
> > Good question, the answer is no, it will go into the memory hole the second they realize that it has no further value to their war on the president.
> ...



Good luck with putting all your conspiracy theories to the legal test. Republicans in congress are happy to allow this trash to swirl around the blogosphere but they know better than to allow it to come to a legal setting, at least I think they do, they may be just that stupid.


----------



## Mad Scientist (Nov 2, 2012)

The Infidel said:


> No...& who the fuck is Ben Ghazi?


Maybe the OP means Ben Gazzara?

Ben Gazzara Biography - Facts, Birthday, Life Story - Biography.com


----------



## blackhawk (Nov 2, 2012)

mad scientist said:


> the infidel said:
> 
> 
> > no...& who the fuck is ben ghazi?
> ...



lol


----------



## jillian (Nov 2, 2012)

Rocko said:


> occupied said:
> 
> 
> > Good question, the answer is no, it will go into the memory hole the second they realize that it has no further value to their war on the president.
> ...



because that's what sore-losers like doing... 

no matter what it does to the country.

no one is impeaching the president...same as no one tried baby bush for war crimes.

see how that works?

no matter what kind of obama-deranged loons are in the H of R.


----------



## Liability (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> 
> Will Ben Ghazzi still rule USMB after Nov 6th?



Dainty thinks that the conservatives will catch up with the liberals in a general indifference to Benghazi?

No chance.


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> ...



USMB Covers News MSM Will Not!!!

the military decided it do not have enough info....


----------



## Rozman (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> 
> Will Ben Ghazzi still rule USMB after Nov 6th?



For me i will care about Benghazi until we get all questions answered.
Mainly what the hell happened.
When did this administration first know the embassy  and the Consulate were under attack
and what did they do about it for starters.


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Only an oddball would confuse Ben GAzzara with Ben Ghazzi


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

What did the Military Brass know and when did they know it?


USMB Covers News MSM Will Not!!!


----------



## occupied (Nov 2, 2012)

Liability said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> ...



Can't speak for everyone but personally I am only indifferent to the political attack on the president which happens to account for 99% of the traffic in this website lately.


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

occupied said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



Conservatives are a minority


----------



## Liability (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> occupied said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



Dainty wishes that were true.

Dainty is a delusional puss.


----------



## PredFan (Nov 2, 2012)

occupied said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



And well it should. Obama lied to cover up for his appalling lack of Foreign Policy skills and 4 people died. It would have been more if not for the two Navy Seals.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Nov 2, 2012)

Will they?

Look at it this way.  When's the last time you saw the front page of 'Politics' saturated with birther threads, 

or fast and furious threads,

or Reverend Wright threads?

This RW conspiratorial demonization of the President will fade away like all the rest of their feverish fantasies do...

...which is the good news.  The bad news is they'll replace it with something even crazier.


----------



## Liability (Nov 2, 2012)

occupied said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



^ clearly not indifferent to it.

And a political attack on the failed incumbent is perfectly appropriate in our Constitutional Republic.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> occupied said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



As in, legally too immature to qualify as adults?  

lol


----------



## Warrior102 (Nov 2, 2012)

occupied said:


> Good question, the answer is no, it will go into the memory hole the second they realize that it has no further value to their war on the president.



The deaths of Americans is no value?
You insane dikbrain?


----------



## occupied (Nov 2, 2012)

Liability said:


> occupied said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



Conspiracy theories as a valid political attack by even the leadership of the GOP is acceptable? Maybe to you.


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 2, 2012)

Will the left suddenly start caring about Benghazi when President Romney orders a full scale investigation and starts arresting those responsible?


----------



## occupied (Nov 2, 2012)

Katzndogz said:


> Will the left suddenly start caring about Benghazi when President Romney orders a full scale investigation and starts arresting those responsible?



Romney being president and actually doing anything is a fantasy just like everything else they think they have going for them.


----------



## Murf76 (Nov 2, 2012)

Vel said:


> The Obama WhiteHouse did NOTHING! Special forces were two hours away.
> 
> Benghazi consulate warned 3 hours before attack of militia gathering arms
> POSTED AT 10:41 AM ON NOVEMBER 2, 2012 BY ED MORRISSEY
> ...



That's an additional three hours that this administration had to respond... not to mention the MONTH they had of knowing that conditions had deteriorated.  I'm so disgusted.


----------



## depotoo (Nov 2, 2012)

you can bet your a** I will still care and demand answers.  Doesn't matter one iota who is elected.


----------



## The Infidel (Nov 2, 2012)

Rocko said:


> occupied said:
> 
> 
> > Good question, the answer is no, it will go into the memory hole the second they realize that it has no further value to their war on the president.
> ...



Maybe Obama's lawyer will be Been Gay Z.


----------



## Dot Com (Nov 2, 2012)

whatever Fox news tells them to do


----------



## jwoodie (Nov 2, 2012)

Dreamy said:


> blastoff said:
> 
> 
> > Barry wants everyone to wait until the investigation is complete so we will know exactly what happened.
> ...



If Romney wins, I hope he doesn't let Obama off the hook the way Bush did for Clinton.


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> occupied said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



Conservatives are a minority in America.


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

tkutch said:


> sore-losers!  Tell that to the families of...


----------



## jwoodie (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> 
> Will Ben Ghazzi still rule USMB after Nov 6th?



*The real question is:  Why don't Left Wingers care at all?*


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

BLack Hawk Down


----------



## PredFan (Nov 2, 2012)

depotoo said:


> you can bet your a** I will still care and demand answers.  Doesn't matter one iota who is elected.



Agreed, obama should be disgraced in the way he deserves. Whether he's POTUS or not.


----------



## healthmyths (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> 
> Will Ben Ghazzi still rule USMB after Nov 6th?



ABSOLUTELY and your ignorance is appalling!
Why not just take a second and find out HOW to spell.. Benghazi!!!!

TIP!!! Do a Google search on "Ben Ghazzi" and you'll get this:  "Did you mean: Benghazi? "

The point is TAKE some time and have an intelligent comment instead of verifying your laziness and as a result doubts regarding your intelligence!
And to answer your question  HELL YES!!!

Because it is an impeachable while Obama is still in office to be a "MURDERER"! 
In the interview with Glenn, Woods detailed his encounters with the top members of the Obama administration, including the President himself.

&#8220;I&#8217;m a retired attorney for six years I was an administrative law judge and in the several thousands cases I heard my job was to tell who was telling the truth and who wasn&#8217;t,&#8221; Woods explained. &#8220;There were four pods at Andrews Air Force Base and when he (Obama) came over to where we were I could tell he was very conflicted person who was not at peace with himself. Shaking hands with him quite frankly was like shaking hands with a dead fish. His face was pointed towards me but he would not look me in the eye. His eyes were over my shoulder and not in a forceful voice said &#8216;I&#8217;m really sorry Mr. Woods.&#8217;&#8221;

&#8220;And I could tell he was not sorry. He had no remorse,&#8221; Woods continued.

&#8220;The Vice President was also there,&#8221; Woods explained. &#8220;He said &#8216;I&#8217;m Joe Biden&#8217;. He said he had received one of these &#8216;damn phone calls&#8217; when he had lost a family member. And then about a half hour later he approached me and said &#8211; and these are the exact words  he said I don&#8217;t speak like this &#8211; quote and in an extremely loud and boisterous voice he said:* &#8216;Did your sons always have balls the size of cueballs?&#8217;&#8221;*

&#8220;I will ask you the question: Is that the voice of someone who is truly sorry?&#8221; Woods asked Glenn.

Glenn was most taken aback by the story of what Hillary Clinton told Woods. For over a week, the White House has been trying to push the narrative that President Obama said from the beginning that the attack on the embassy was a terrorist attack, not the a protest that got out of hand . But Clinton&#8217;s statements to Woods conflicted with that statement.

Woods explained, &#8220;I do appreciate her taking the time from her schedule to meet with the four families. While we were in the pod over there with our family she came over shook my hand and I reached out and hugged her shoulder. Her countenance was not good. And she made the statement to me that first of all she was sorry and then she said * &#8216;We will make sure the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted.&#8217; &#8221;&#8221;*


----------



## Lovebears65 (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> 
> Will Ben Ghazzi still rule USMB after Nov 6th?



Yes, because I want someone punished for this


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

jwoodie said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> ...



Because Staten Island is a land of victims asking for government help?


----------



## The Infidel (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> BLack Hawk Down



Racist


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

healthmyths said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> ...



Google 'I am stupid'


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Lovebears65 said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> ...



Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahaha..........

grow up!


----------



## mamooth (Nov 2, 2012)

The cultists here aren't ever going to give up. After all, even though Fast & Furious was revealed to be entirely a FOX/Issa fabrication, they still believe Obama was responsible for that. They fall for every idiot conspiracy theory that FOX spoonfeeds them, and they'll go to their graves screaming hatred at anyone who isn't as gullible as themselves. 

It's not possible to reason with these FOX cultists, being that they're all such freakin' retards. So just point and laugh instead.


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

I forgot all about FAUX & Furious


----------



## Claudette (Nov 2, 2012)

I wonder how those serving in the military will view Benghazi??

Those folks vote.


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Too many minorities in the US Military these days.

Conservatives are going to have to start using a different tactic


----------



## The Infidel (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> healthmyths said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



It will ask "Did you mean Dante"


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



The military doesn't make that call they just gave the info from the drones to those in charge and followed the orders to stand down, except for one guy who ignored the orders and went to try and save the annex and got himself killed (if he had the rest of his people with him that wouldn't have been likely to have happened)


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

The Infidel said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > healthmyths said:
> ...



Google "lame"


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Military Brass is in on the call. They advise. If their advise is 'too little info'


Black Hawk Down


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Military Advisers Tell C-in-C 


"Too little info"


FAUX Nation demands more US Military members should have been killed


----------



## The Infidel (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> The Infidel said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

poor Infie, still suffering penis envy?


----------



## rightwinger (Nov 2, 2012)

occupied said:


> Good question, the answer is no, it will go into the memory hole the second they realize that it has no further value to their war on the president.



What ever happened to all those GOP  bills requiring candidates to provide their birth certificates?


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac (Nov 2, 2012)

The investigations will continue regardless of who wins. The difference is how fast we reach an outcome based on stonewalling if Obama wins.


----------



## bitterlyclingin (Nov 2, 2012)

Of course! If Obama be re elected, Heaven forbid, this profound dereliction of duty is the quickest path to impeachment and ridding America of this poseur, this abomination.


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

&#8220;(The) basic principle is that you don&#8217;t deploy forces into harm&#8217;s way without knowing what&#8217;s going on; without having some real-time information about what&#8217;s taking place,&#8221; Panetta told Pentagon reporters. &#8220;And as a result of not having that kind of information,* the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I* felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.&#8221;


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Grampa Murked U said:


> The investigations will continue regardless of who wins. The difference is how fast we reach an outcome based on stonewalling if Obama wins.



(The) basic principle is that you dont deploy forces into harms way without knowing whats going on; without having some real-time information about whats taking place, Panetta told Pentagon reporters. And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> 
> Will Ben Ghazzi still rule USMB after Nov 6th?



Dante; you ignorant fuck.

Benghazi won't go away. If Obama sycophants steal the election for your Messiah®, the GOP will pursue impeachment over Benghazi. If honest elections are held, with Obama ousted, then criminal charges will be pursued.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 2, 2012)

jillian said:


> because that's what sore-losers like doing...
> 
> no matter what it does to the country.
> 
> ...



You mean like you sore losers did with Nixon?

Obama betrayed the nation in order to protect his reelection campaign. What Obama has done is FAR worse than a two bit break in to find evidence of wiretaps. Impeach the fucker.


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> ...



and the Democratic Senate will dismiss



next


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

&#8220;(The) basic principle is that you don&#8217;t deploy forces into harm&#8217;s way without knowing what&#8217;s going on; without having some real-time information about what&#8217;s taking place,&#8221; Panetta told Pentagon reporters. &#8220;And as a result of not having that kind of information, *the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I *felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.&#8221;

.


----------



## liarintheWH (Nov 2, 2012)

What a stupid fucking question. lmao @ Ben Ghazzi. 

I really hope no one takes this clown dante seriously.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> Google 'I am stupid'



Okay.

Let me google that for you


----------



## mamooth (Nov 2, 2012)

Even loyal Republican Geraldo Rivera is tearing the GOP a new one for how badly they're acting here.

Geraldo slams

Thus, Geraldo now joins the growing list of "Fellow Republicans to be tossed under the bus".


----------



## Claudette (Nov 2, 2012)

Believe me, no one does. 

All you have to do is look at his posts. He's perfectly okay with four dead Americans as long as Barry gets that second term. 

What an asswipe.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 2, 2012)

mamooth said:


> Even loyal Republican Geraldo Rivera is tearing the GOP a new one for how badly they're acting here.



How did loyal Republican Rachel Maddow react?


----------



## Claudette (Nov 2, 2012)

mamooth said:


> Even loyal Republican Geraldo Rivera is tearing the GOP a new one for how badly they're acting here.
> 
> Geraldo slams
> 
> Thus, Geraldo now joins the growing list of "Fellow Republicans to be tossed under the bus".



Just who do you think give a shit about Geraldo??

You seem to think he's somebody but the rest of us know he isn't.


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 2, 2012)

The Pentagon said they had a FEST team all prepared to go.  They just never got the order.

Sources: Key task force not convened during Benghazi consulate attack - CBS News


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Ben Ghazzi, Ben Dover, and Ben Gay walk into a bar...

Hey?
Where's Liability?


----------



## mamooth (Nov 2, 2012)

As predicted, under the bus has gone Geraldo. They sure adored him when he was busting on unions, but he broke from the party line here, so they revved up the Greyhound.

Republicans, just stop tapdancing on American corpses for political gain. It makes everyone want to puke when they see you do that. Everyone knows you're lying when you pretend to care. The charade isn't working, so why are you still trying?


----------



## Qantrill (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> 
> Will Ben Ghazzi still rule USMB after Nov 6th?



You know the way to shut the "right wingers" up? Obama confesses his gd sins and takes responsibility for his FUCK UPS. And that includes INTENTIONAL FUCK UPS. Like from the middle of June forward. He murdered those four people.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 2, 2012)

mamooth said:


> As predicted, under the bus has gone Geraldo. They sure adored him when he was busting on unions, but he broke from the party line here, so they revved up the Greyhound.
> 
> Republicans, just stop tapdancing on American corpses for political gain. It makes everyone want to puke when they see you do that. Everyone knows you're lying when you pretend to care. The charade isn't working, so why are you still trying?



Righhtt.. Geraldo has been a favorite since doing the Al Capone vault thingy..

You're a fucking clown. Fox has Geraldo as BALANCE, moron. They have him BECAUSE HE'S a LEFTY, stupid.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 2, 2012)

Qantrill said:


> You know the way to shut the "right wingers" up? Obama confesses his gd sins and takes responsibility for his FUCK UPS. And that includes INTENTIONAL FUCK UPS. Like from the middle of June forward. He murdered those four people.



Nah, Obama didn't "murder" anyone. Obama is an incompetent cocksucker, literally on both counts, but his failure is the inability to lead or make a decision. His impeachable crime in the coverup and lies in the aftermath. Obama didn't intend for Stevens or the Seals to die, he just lacked the leadership skills to prevent their deaths.


----------



## asaratis (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...





Dante said:


> Lovebears65 said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...





Dante said:


> Ben Ghazzi, Ben Dover, and Ben Gay walk into a bar...
> 
> Hey?
> Where's Liability?


Your posts get more asinine as I progress through the thread.

Of course, Benghazi will "count" after the election.  It will serve as yet another piece of evidence that Obozo is a coward and a liar and is totally unfit to be the President of this nation.  Whether he wins or loses the election, he is still a piece of shit Marxist asshole!


----------



## GoneBezerk (Nov 2, 2012)

Idiot.....who is this Ben Ghazzi?

Is he some Italian Ben Stein?



Dante said:


> *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> 
> Will Ben Ghazzi still rule USMB after Nov 6th?


----------



## Capitalist (Nov 2, 2012)

I'm guessing that you are addressing this to me? Maybe?
It's Tuco's face and at that time line for the movie, Lincoln was President.
Lincoln, a very angry Republican, that every Democrat wanted dead.
The Dems, the party of racism, hate and slavery.
Now they own all the great urban plantations and the colored people that live within.




jasonnfree said:


> Capitalist said:
> 
> 
> > *The Butcher Of Benghazi Wants To Keep The Choppers and Jets *
> ...


----------



## Wehrwolfen (Nov 2, 2012)

_Why Obama Chose to Let Them Die in Benghazi​_






*By Karin McQuillan
November 2, 2012




The burning question is why Obama didn't give orders to defend our consulate and American lives in Benghazi. The answer is becoming clearer each time President Obama and Secretary of Defense Panetta issue a denial or explanation of their inaction. 

To the president's surprise, he chanced on an honest reporter during a local interview on the campaign trail in Denver. On October 26, for the first time, Obama was asked directly about the explosive reports on CBS and Fox News, a week earlier, that the CIA and our military denied direct requests for help by the Americans fighting for their lives during the seven-hour battle in Benghazi.

Denver TV's Kyle Clark twice tried to pin Obama down by asking the key question: "Were they denied requests for help during the attack?"

Obama's answer is the proof of his guilt, and it gives us a clue as to the doctrine informing his decision to do nothing. The most damaging part of Obama's evasive answer is this:


[I
]... the minute I found out what was happening, I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to. ... I guarantee you that everyone in the state department, our military, the CIA, you name it, had number-one priority making sure that people were safe
.

This is the blatant lie that condemns the liar. The president says here that immediately, "the minute I found out what was happening," he gave the order to the military, the CIA, to everyone, to secure our personnel in Benghazi and do "whatever we need to."

Yet the undeniable fact is that nothing was done. We know that the CIA security agent in Benghazi, Tyrone Woods, asked for permission to rescue Ambassador Stevens when Stevens was still alive and in the safe room. Woods was told twice by the CIA to stand down. He then disobeyed direct orders and rescued the survivors at the consulate, but it was too late for Stevens and Sean Smith.

Secretary of Defense Panetta tells us the military had gunships and Special Forces less than two hours away in Sicily but felt it was too "risky" to send in reinforcements or air cover. It would have been normal military procedure to pre-position air cover and assets from Sicily to Benghazi, but Panetta says this was not done. The air support and FAST platoons, we are told, were left in Sicily. All the U.S. military did was send two unarmed drones to observe the battle.

So if President Obama is not lying about his directives, he is saying that the CIA and the Defense Department and our military chain of command disobeyed the direct order of our commander in chief to do everything in their power to rescue our people under attack in Benghazi. And that as commander in chief, Obama did nothing in response to their dereliction of duty.

That doesn't happen. No one believes that; the president is lying. He did not issue directives to the CIA, our military, and State to "secure our personnel" and "do whatever we need to do."

We know it was not the CIA on its own that made the decision to abandon Ambassador Stevens and the eight others with him in the consulate. The CIA say they did not advise anyone in the administration to deny help to the Americans in Benghazi. A CIA spokesman on October 27 issued this statement:



No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate
.[/I]*

*Read more: 
Articles: Why Obama Chose to Let Them Die in Benghazi*


----------



## Capitalist (Nov 2, 2012)

Neotrotsky said:


> Indeed
> 
> before you know it
> People will be saying Romney killed a women with cancer


Exactly.......


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

GoneBezerk said:


> Idiot.....who is this Ben Ghazzi?
> 
> Is he some Italian Ben Stein?
> 
> ...


----------



## liarintheWH (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> GoneBezerk said:
> 
> 
> > Idiot.....who is this Ben Ghazzi?
> ...



Just admit you're a fool already.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Nov 2, 2012)

I'm willing to have a reasoned, intelligent discussion of Benghazi with any conservative who will preface it by admitting that this tragedy was not even close to being as bad as Reagan's huge blunder in Beirut.

Or Bush's even greater blunder in Iraq.


----------



## GoneBezerk (Nov 2, 2012)

That's your response for confusing a city in Libya with some guy in NYC? 

You're an idiot on steroids.



Dante said:


> GoneBezerk said:
> 
> 
> > Idiot.....who is this Ben Ghazzi?
> ...


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Nov 2, 2012)

Who the fuck is Ben Ghazi?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 2, 2012)

GoneBezerk said:


> Idiot.....who is this Ben Ghazzi?
> 
> Is he some Italian Ben Stein?



Dainty is a mental retard. Mock him or ignore him, but never take him seriously.


----------



## kaz (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*



yes


----------



## BlindBoo (Nov 2, 2012)

Turn off Fox.

It's Bad News for America.


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)




----------



## Claudette (Nov 2, 2012)

Perhaps you should tune into FOX.

You might actually learn something. 

Oh wait. You want that fuck back in for another four years. Never mind.


----------



## Dreamy (Nov 2, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> Turn off Fox.
> 
> It's Bad News for America.



What do you watch?


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> Turn off Fox.
> 
> It's Bad News for America.





(The) basic principle is that you dont deploy forces into harms way without knowing whats going on; without having some real-time information about whats taking place, Panetta told Pentagon reporters. And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.


----------



## BlindBoo (Nov 2, 2012)

Dreamy said:


> BlindBoo said:
> 
> 
> > Turn off Fox.
> ...



Does it really matter?  Faithful Faux viewers tell me that all other news sources are part of the ubber-liberal plot to turn America into a socialist haven.


----------



## BlindBoo (Nov 2, 2012)

Claudette said:


> Perhaps you should tune into FOX.
> 
> You might actually learn something.
> 
> Oh wait. You want that fuck back in for another four years. Never mind.



I did tune into Faux the other day and I did learn something.  They're still the same hacks and liars that they were the last time I watched them.


----------



## Dreamy (Nov 2, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> Dreamy said:
> 
> 
> > BlindBoo said:
> ...



No it does matter. I think Fox leans right and others lean left. So I want to know which one you watch that is so neutral. I don't think it is any big deal which way a network leans as long as the viewer is not a partisan hack and actually looks up news independently of the TV news.

I bet you do being the discriminate and astute political talent that you are. 

So tell me which TV news keeps you informed without bias.


----------



## Avatar4321 (Nov 2, 2012)

It sure isnt going anywhere if Obama is reelected. But even if he isn't, we aren't going to rest till we have some answers.


----------



## Nightson (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> *Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?*
> 
> Will Ben Ghazzi still rule USMB after Nov 6th?




I think most Americans--throughout the coming months--will continue to question the  details of the Benghazi killings.


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> Claudette said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps you should tune into FOX.
> ...



exactly


(The) basic principle is that you dont deploy forces into harms way without knowing whats going on; without having some real-time information about whats taking place, Panetta told Pentagon reporters. And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

Pew: MSNBC&#8217;s coverage of Romney more negative than Fox&#8217;s of Obama

h/t Hotair

_MSNBC was especially negative in its treatment of Romney&#8217;s policy prescriptions. Fully 75% of the stories focused on Romney&#8217;s policies were negative compared with 1% that were positive. For Obama, by comparison, 32% of policy stories were favorable while 18% were negative.​_


----------



## Synthaholic (Nov 2, 2012)

_*Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?  *_


Huma Abedin


----------



## Vel (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> BlindBoo said:
> 
> 
> > Claudette said:
> ...



Really? What real time information did they have on the ground when they sent forces into Abbottabad?


----------



## Katzndogz (Nov 2, 2012)

You can see your socialist heaven right now.  It's called Staten Island.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> Turn off Fox.
> 
> It's Bad News for America.



How CBS ?


CBS (11/01/12):  If the MSM reports on this,,,, The dams starting to break.

The [Counterterrorism Security Group] is the one group thats supposed to know what resources every agency has. They know of multiple options and have the ability to coordinate counterterrorism assets across all the agencies, a high-ranking government official told CBS News. They were not allowed to do their job. They were not called upon.

Counterterrorism sources and internal emails reviewed by *CBS News express frustration that key responders were ready to deploy, but were not called upon to help in the attack*

Another senior counter terrorism official says a *hostage rescue team was alternately asked to get ready and then stand down throughout the night, as officials seemed unable to make up their minds.*

A third potential responder from a counter-terror force stationed in Europe says components of AFICOM  the militarys Africa Command based in Stuttgart, Germany  were working on course of action during the assault. But no plan was put to use

The response process was isolated at the most senior level, says an official referring to top officials in the executive branch. My fellow counterterrorism professionals and I (were) not consulted.​


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Neotrotsky said:


> Pew: MSNBC&#8217;s coverage of Romney more negative than Fox&#8217;s of Obama
> 
> h/t Hotair
> 
> ...


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

Synthaholic said:


> _*Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?  *_
> 
> 
> Huma Abedin



Since Romney will win

The question is will....

Left wingers and MSM suddenly remember how bad the unemployment numbers are or
how high the gas prices are or our poor soldiers, more who have died in Afghanistan under Papa Obama than Bush?


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Neotrotsky said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > _*Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?  *_
> ...



(The) basic principle is that you dont deploy forces into harms way without knowing whats going on; without having some real-time information about whats taking place, Panetta told Pentagon reporters. And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

Obama's Last Press Conference


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Romney's latest spokesperson...


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

Papa Obama's latest spokesperson..


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)




----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> Lindsey Graham on Fox now.. Stating this President should have closed the Consulate, having had NUMEROUS warnings, even from our own Ambassador begging for security and this President left our people for dead, targets. A total failure of Leadership, an Administration trying desperately to ride out the election clock, refusing to answer all questions posed by the Oversight Committee in direct violation of the Constitution which gives CONGRESS oversight so this kind of shit doesn't happen. I've said it all along.. "You can run but you can't hide." Obama will LOSE this election BIG and all of his dirty lies will surface.. Liberals prove they cannot be trusted to govern, PERIOD.. Their constituents are ZOMBIES who don't care about the truth any longer which makes them entirely useless and worthless in the critical balance of holding our leaders accountable.




Well thank God Papa Obama was safe and packing for a Vegas fundraiser
that night


----------



## Meathead (Nov 2, 2012)

All this time I thought this thread was about some guy named Ben Ghazzi.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

Claudette said:


> Wehrwolfen said:
> 
> 
> > BlindBoo said:
> ...




No doubt
A lack of leadership has caused much heartache for these poor families
At least, when Romney wins, the MSM can get back to their job
of really questioning a President

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5oRMEELR3U]Father of Navy SEAL Killed in Libya Accuses Obama Administration of Lying and Murder - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Why Ben Ghazzi doesn't matter....
*
Sudden danger signs in polling as Election Day nears
*
By Dick Morris

Published November 02, 2012

FoxNews.com

Read more: Sudden danger signs in polling as Election Day nears | Fox News

The Ghazzi dog isn't hunting


----------



## EriktheRed (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> Why Ben Ghazzi doesn't matter....
> *
> Sudden danger signs in polling as Election Day nears
> *
> ...



I wouldn't believe Dick Morris even if he were demonstrating gravity by dropping an apple on the ground. Even if if he's giving out potential good news (IOW, bad news for GOoPers) his word isn't to be trusted on shit.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

Indeed

No doubt when they factor in the rise in unemployment with the new numbers and the fact
that Papa Obama had a lower unemployment rate when he came into office

that should help Papa Obama's poor pool numbers even more


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 2, 2012)

BlindBoo said:


> Does it really matter?



Yes, the fact that you get your "news" from comedy central is vital to understanding the utter lack of grasp on reality by you.



> Faithful Faux viewers tell me that all other news sources are part of the ubber-liberal plot to turn America into a socialist haven.



Sure the do, sparky.

By "faithful faux viewers" you mean that Jon Stewart does skits of what Fox viewers are supposed to be and you believe that it's real...

Of course, you fucking believe Obama is competent, so your beliefs are a bit beyond fucked up.


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

EriktheRed said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Why Ben Ghazzi doesn't matter....
> ...



along with t bad news, he is out there laying the foundation for the fall of Wingnut Nation


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 2, 2012)

Neotrotsky said:


> Obama's Last Press Conference



All those ladies cross their legs in exactly the same way...

Is this like the "Stepford bitter old hags and fags?"


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

13% of Obama's 2008 Voters Are Defecting to Romney; 3% Undecided

_Obama won relatively big -- more than any Democratic president in recent memory -- but not so big he can afford that level of defection.

70 million voted for Obama in 2008; 60 million voted for McCain.

13% of 70 million is 9.1 million. Subtract that from 70 million and add it to 60 million and you get... _​

I sure hope Papa Obama's staff leaves the 'M' and 'R' keys on the keyboards
on the way out...


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> > Obama's Last Press Conference
> ...



and with the way Joy Behar looks....
one might even have "drag"


----------



## depotoo (Nov 2, 2012)

mamooth said:


> Even loyal Republican Geraldo Rivera is tearing the GOP a new one for how badly they're acting here.
> 
> Geraldo slams
> 
> Thus, Geraldo now joins the growing list of "Fellow Republicans to be tossed under the bus".



since when has he ever been a Republican? He may claim it, but he is left of being a moderate.


----------



## Dante (Nov 2, 2012)

Dante said:


> EriktheRed said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



Back in January, people had the race close. So where is Romney's gain?

Get it yet?




> January 16th, 2012
> 04:00 PM ET
> 291 days ago
> CNN Poll: Obama tied with Romney & Paul in November showdowns
> ...



add this!


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 2, 2012)

Claudette said:


> Perhaps you should tune into FOX.
> 
> You might actually learn something.
> 
> Oh wait. You want that fuck back in for another four years. Never mind.



Too bad for them
this will not be the case...


----------



## daveman (Nov 2, 2012)

Synthaholic said:


> _*Will Right Wingers Care About Ben Ghazzi On November 7th?  *_
> 
> 
> Huma Abedin



Will left wingers care about Tyrone Powers and Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry on November 7th?

Probably not.  They haven't cared about them yet.

Hail Obama!


----------



## editec (Nov 3, 2012)

Now how many times were embassies and personnel attacked while Bush II was in offivce, again?

60 times or so wasn't it?


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 3, 2012)

How many Ambassadors were murdered ?

Oh,  last time was under Carter

which is probably why the Papa Obama Administration
is trying to cover up for this story


----------



## BluePhantom (Nov 3, 2012)

editec said:


> Now how many times were embassies and personnel attacked while Bush II was in offivce, again?
> 
> 60 times or so wasn't it?



sigh.....it's not that we were attacked that is the problem. It's that Obama was warned multiple times and failed to prepare.  It's that when the attack came he showed incompetence in dealing wth it and then directed his administration to lie their asses off to cover it up. 

BTW...in case you haven't noticed Bush is not running for office.


----------



## candycorn (Nov 3, 2012)

It should be in the rubber room with all of the other useless threads.  Nobody outside of Conservistan cares about this topic.


----------



## daveman (Nov 3, 2012)

candycorn said:


> It should be in the rubber room with all of the other useless threads.  Nobody outside of Conservistan cares about this topic.


Certainly Obamabots and bootlickers don't give a damn that Obama's incompetence cost 4 Americans their lives.

Hail Obama!


----------



## Dante (Nov 4, 2012)

allowed Americans to die.

On the issue of a military response, the Obama administration got an unusual boost Friday by former George W. Bush administration Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, who wrote in a blog post that "the US did almost everything possible to protect our people once the attacks had started, though not in advance.  Decision makers in Washington appear to have been leaning forward, as they should have been. The military's most capable rescue force, based on the East Coast, was deployed immediately (something that is very rarely done), but  given the distances involved  arrived at Sigonella only after the crisis was over." Sigonella is the site of a U.S. military installation in Sicily.


----------



## Dante (Nov 4, 2012)

account of CIA actions, for example, shows that the agency's security officers did not appear to have the heavy weapons they needed to repel the attack, and it shows how deeply the U.S. was relying on Libyan security forces that melted away. Congress and a State Department accountability review board are investigating why the security was so inadequate, both for the ambassador and for a major CIA intelligence operation as Benghazi was growing more dangerous.


----------



## Dante (Nov 4, 2012)

In fact, CIA security officers responded to the attack on the State Department compound within 25 minutes, U.S. officials said, though it took them 50 minutes to arrive. CIA officers did not have laser targeting equipment, they said.

And Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta "ordered all appropriate forces to respond to the unfolding events in Benghazi, but the attack was over before those forces could be employed," said Little, the Pentagon spokesman.

"There were no orders to anybody to stand down in providing support," a senior intelligence official said.

Armed drones were not nearby. Even if they had been, it's not clear that they would have done any good, officials say.

"People think 'armed drones' are some sort of magical robot wizards that can materialize out of thin air and identify a terrorist through facial recognition software from 20,000 feet," a senior congressional official said. "It doesn't work like that."


----------



## Dante (Nov 4, 2012)

In his post on the Web site of the American Enterprise Institute, the neo-conservative equivalent of the Vatican, Wolfowitz said that after &#8220;talking with someone who has spoken directly with key general officers and others involved in the U.S. response to the Benghazi attacks,&#8221; he concluded...



> &#8211;  Contrary to claims on numerous conservative Web sites: &#8220;There was no AC-130 gunship in the region.&#8221;
> 
> (Defense Department spokesman George Little told Bloomberg the same thing yesterday in an e-mail.)
> 
> ...



Obama&#8217;s New Libyan Defense Chief: Bush&#8217;s Paul Wolfowitz, on Benghazi


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 4, 2012)

candycorn said:


> It should be in the rubber room with all of the other useless threads.  Nobody outside of Conservistan cares about this topic.



Right
does that include their families


----------



## candycorn (Nov 4, 2012)

Neotrotsky said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > It should be in the rubber room with all of the other useless threads.  Nobody outside of Conservistan cares about this topic.
> ...



As a message board topic it's 2 months old.  Nobody cares.  Sorry.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 4, 2012)

Whatever helps you to sleep at night


----------



## Cheddarmelon (Nov 4, 2012)

Neotrotsky said:


> Whatever helps you to sleep at night



Like parroting debunked nonsense over and over and over again?


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 4, 2012)

Debunked, hardly
Downplayed by the Left and the MSM, sure 

Granted, the impact on the family of these poor individuals on the Papa Obama
campaign is of little concern to them. No their concern is more noble, a fear of how it impacts them.....

After all, Papa Obama has an election to lose,,,er win
We must go Forward

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8TjbbpVLh4]Forward- The Obama Way - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Synthaholic (Nov 4, 2012)




----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 4, 2012)

Does support include 
helping him with his cover-up?


----------



## g5000 (Nov 4, 2012)

BluePhantom said:


> emptystep said:
> 
> 
> > Clementine said:
> ...



This is complete and total bullshit.  A laser designator is completely invisible and can only be detected by the proper sensing equipment.

I wish you assholes would stop making shit up!

.


----------



## g5000 (Nov 4, 2012)

Clementine said:


> Now Obama is trying to say that he gave orders to Marines to protect themselves.   BULLSHIT!!!  This makes no sense considering General Ham was removed from his duties for ignoring orders to stand down.
> 
> The Marine who painted the target, clearly in anticipation of the drone striking the target, was killed and it's likely because he gave his position away when he pointed out the target with the laser.
> 
> ...




You, too.  Stop making shit up.  IF, and I say IF, a Marine was using a laser designator, it was not visible to the mortar team.

.


----------



## Cheddarmelon (Nov 4, 2012)

g5000 said:


> Clementine said:
> 
> 
> > Now Obama is trying to say that he gave orders to Marines to protect themselves.   BULLSHIT!!!  This makes no sense considering General Ham was removed from his duties for ignoring orders to stand down.
> ...



Additionally, accurate reports indicate that there was NO armed drone in the area.


----------



## daveman (Nov 4, 2012)

g5000 said:


> BluePhantom said:
> 
> 
> > emptystep said:
> ...



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpY6670zhXo]Infrared light seen through a mobile phone&#39;s camera - YouTube[/ame]

Northrop Grumman's Ground Laser Target Designator (GLTD) II
Wavelength: 1.064 ìm​
No one's making anything up.


----------



## daveman (Nov 4, 2012)

g5000 said:


> Clementine said:
> 
> 
> > Now Obama is trying to say that he gave orders to Marines to protect themselves.   BULLSHIT!!!  This makes no sense considering General Ham was removed from his duties for ignoring orders to stand down.
> ...


It certainly could have been if they'd had a cell phone with a camera.  And try to find a cell phone without a camera these days.


----------



## Cheddarmelon (Nov 4, 2012)

daveman said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> > Clementine said:
> ...





No, it couldn't.  It isn't a TV remote, you braindead hick.

Laser designator - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## candycorn (Nov 4, 2012)

Neotrotsky said:


> Does support include
> helping him with his cover-up?



alot of republicans still believe we found WMDs so I guess the answer is yes.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Nov 4, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> > Does support include
> ...



So you feel we should support Papa Obama in his cover-up?
Should we extend that to all Presidents?

I mean, in Nixon's case, no one died but surely
you would not want to support his attempts to cover up?


----------



## candycorn (Nov 5, 2012)

Neotrotsky said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Neotrotsky said:
> ...


Your President Obama is  not covering anything up in the first place.

In the second place, Bush's intel was so thin that his own SOS bristled at some of it.  Bush, himself, said there were no WMDs found.  

My response was for your silly question.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 5, 2012)

editec said:


> Now how many times were embassies and personnel attacked while Bush II was in offivce, again?
> 
> 60 times or so wasn't it?



It's good that you Obamabots are running against Bush; Allah knows you can't beat Romney....


----------



## get_involved (Nov 5, 2012)

Besides failing on the economy Obama lied and people died!

"Ambassador Chris Stevens is Dead and Al Qaeda is Alive!"


----------



## daveman (Nov 5, 2012)

Proof: Obama Refused to Call Benghazi 'Terror,' CBS Covered Up
In an astonishing display of media malpractice, CBS News quietly released proof--two days before the election, far too late to reach the media and the public--that President Barack Obama lied to the public about the Benghazi attack, as well as about his later claim to have called the attack "terrorism" from the beginning.
CBS unveiled additional footage from its 60 Minutes interview with President Obama, conducted on Sep. 12 immediately after Obama had made his statement about the attacks in the Rose Garden, in which Obama quite clearly refuses to call the Benghazi an act of terror when asked a direct question by reporter Steve Kroft:

KROFT: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya Attack, do you believe that this was a terrorism attack?

OBAMA: Well its too early to tell exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans.  And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.​CBS News held onto this footage for more than six weeks, failing to release it even when questions were raised during the Second Presidential Debate as to whether Obama had, in fact, referred to the Benghazi attack as an act of terror before blaming it falsely on demonstrations against an anti-Islamic video. The moderator, CNN's Candy Crowley, intervened on Obama's behalf, falsely declaring he had indeed called the attack an act of terror in his Rose Garden statement, and creating the impression that Romney was wrong.​


----------



## Mr. H. (Nov 5, 2012)

The gravity of this incident is lost on the lame-brained. 
There should be hell to pay.


----------



## daveman (Nov 5, 2012)

Mr. H. said:


> The gravity of this incident is lost on the lame-brained.
> There should be hell to pay.



The retarded Obama boot-lickers will never hold their little tin god responsible for anything.


----------



## Mr. H. (Nov 5, 2012)

daveman said:


> Mr. H. said:
> 
> 
> > The gravity of this incident is lost on the lame-brained.
> ...



Sad that the boot-lickers include the media. 
Control the media control the mind.


----------



## tinydancer (Nov 5, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


So where are you from Candy corn?



You gave it away........


----------



## tinydancer (Nov 5, 2012)

Mr. H. said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Mr. H. said:
> ...



I know half these souls. I had a run in with someone very early on this board over JD Roberts. 

When this is all said and done sir no matter which way it plays out, I am going to nuke some old friends of mine. 

They have pissed me off for the last time. I've had it with them.


----------



## Mr. H. (Nov 5, 2012)

tinydancer said:


> Mr. H. said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Funny (or not so) that you bring that up. I've managed to alienate 4 good friends over the last two election cycles. Two couples that I'd known for 30 years. Why?

Because I refuse to debase myself to their convoluted way of thinking, and I stand my ground. They fucking go vapor lock on me and would rather dissolve decades of friendship than acknlowlege my possession of an opposing opinion.


----------



## daveman (Nov 6, 2012)

Mr. H. said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > Mr. H. said:
> ...


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 6, 2012)

daveman said:


> The retarded Obama boot-lickers will never hold their little tin god responsible for anything.



Then the rest of us better, no matter how today goes. I strongly believe that Romney will win today, but that doesn't let Obama off the hook. He should be prosecuted for Benghazi.


----------



## daveman (Nov 6, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > The retarded Obama boot-lickers will never hold their little tin god responsible for anything.
> ...


Certainly an independent investigation needs to be done.  None of the usual Obama stonewalling and "I'm above the law" bullshit.


----------

