13 Benghazis Happened Under President Bush

[The Rabbi]

For most of those attacks, like the one that killed 9 Americans, Republicans also controlled both houses. Can anyone explain why there were no investigations?

Because they controlled both Houses....

Were there allegations that Bush lied about any of the attacks to better his re-election?
No.

So the only question here is why aren't you outraged that Obama lied about Benghazi?

 

[tinydancer]

For most of those attacks, like the one that killed 9 Americans, Republicans also controlled both houses. Can anyone explain why there were no investigations?

Did the Republicans run to Sunday talk shows and lie their asses off?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

For most of those attacks, like the one that killed 9 Americans, Republicans also controlled both houses. Can anyone explain why there were no investigations?

Were these attacks because of the video or an offensive South Park episode?

 

[ClosedCaption]

All the people on the ground recognized it for what it was. What do you want? Videos of al Qaeda leaders saying they planned a terrorist attack?
The only question here is why aren't you outraged Obama lied about the incident?

You keep asking what I want and the answer is the same: Proof.

Got any or nah? You said he lied....I keep asking how and you keep responding with all outrage, gasps and OMG but no proof of anything

OK, proof has been given. Obama knew the truth at the time it happened. He sent Rice and he himself appeared weeks later blaming a video, which he knew had nothing to do with it.
So we know he lied intentionally.

So my question is, why aren't you outraged by this?

What is this truth Obama knew? and Why are you saying the video had nothing to do with it but you wont tell anyone what the attacks were about and who confirmed it?

 

[Theowl32]

For most of those attacks, like the one that killed 9 Americans, Republicans also controlled both houses. Can anyone explain why there were no investigations?

Because they controlled both Houses....

You are fully aware Obama had a super majority and could have called for investigations.....right? Unless you are saying Obama just did not want hold the republicans to account for all of those MILLIONS of deaths as a result of a deliberate lie....are you?

Do not answer it. It is a rhetorical question. I do not want to get a case of bubble guts or bad gas after reading whatever bullshit you would say.

 

[NYcarbineer]

For most of those attacks, like the one that killed 9 Americans, Republicans also controlled both houses. Can anyone explain why there were no investigations?

Because they controlled both Houses....

Were there allegations that Bush lied about any of the attacks to better his re-election?
No.

So the only question here is why aren't you outraged that Obama lied about Benghazi?

I recall that the original ODS rants about Benghazi accused the administration of not having enough security there in the first place.

Why did Bush allow 13 attacks to occur? Lack of security?

 

[NYcarbineer]

There were clear threats made directly to Ambassador Stevens and they were made online for all the world to see. There were many concerns expressed in the months leading up to the attack. Numerous attacks in the area, including one to the embassy, made it clear that it was a danger zone. The easiest solution would have been to get our people out of there.

.

I guess you're prepared to back up the above distinction by showing us proof that none of the places or people in the 13 attacks under Bush

ever received threats? You just haven't gotten around to post that evidence that would make you post better than useless baseless drivel?

 

[Jarhead]

For most of those attacks, like the one that killed 9 Americans, Republicans also controlled both houses. Can anyone explain why there were no investigations?

Because they controlled both Houses....

No.

There were no investigations because all of the information released by the white house following those incidents were not "cloudy"....were not "contradictory"....were not incredulous.....

There were no investigations because the whereabouts of the President were known.....the whereabouts of the SoS were known....the whereabouts of the Security Advisor were known.

Are you aware that not ONE of them...the National Security Advisor, the President OR the SoS were in the situation room at all during the entire event?

No. Of course you didn't know it. And even if you did? What difference does it make you will say. The President can be at other places and still know what is going on you will say.

Sure. That's how it works.

Fucking moron.

 

[boedicca]

ZERO Benghazis happened under Bush.

No diplomats were killed due to the Bush administration refusing their requests for security.

 

[Darkwind]

Because they controlled both Houses....

Were there allegations that Bush lied about any of the attacks to better his re-election?
No.

So the only question here is why aren't you outraged that Obama lied about Benghazi?

I recall that the original ODS rants about Benghazi accused the administration of not having enough security there in the first place.

Why did Bush allow 13 attacks to occur? Lack of security?

You recall incorrectly. The questions asked where, "Why wasn't a rescue mission launched immediately after the first phone call came in?"

You remember that, right?

 

[Jarhead]

Because they controlled both Houses....

Were there allegations that Bush lied about any of the attacks to better his re-election?
No.

So the only question here is why aren't you outraged that Obama lied about Benghazi?

I recall that the original ODS rants about Benghazi accused the administration of not having enough security there in the first place.

Why did Bush allow 13 attacks to occur? Lack of security?

Lying spinner...

The concern was that the Ambassador in Benghazi asked several times for more security and the question was "why were those requests denied"

If you must spin in a debate, then you must be insecure in your position.

 

[The Rabbi]

Because they controlled both Houses....

Were there allegations that Bush lied about any of the attacks to better his re-election?
No.

So the only question here is why aren't you outraged that Obama lied about Benghazi?

I recall that the original ODS rants about Benghazi accused the administration of not having enough security there in the first place.

Why did Bush allow 13 attacks to occur? Lack of security?

No, the only question is why are you not outraged that Obama lied.

 

[Jarhead]

Were there allegations that Bush lied about any of the attacks to better his re-election?
No.

So the only question here is why aren't you outraged that Obama lied about Benghazi?

I recall that the original ODS rants about Benghazi accused the administration of not having enough security there in the first place.

Why did Bush allow 13 attacks to occur? Lack of security?

You recall incorrectly. The questions asked where, "Why wasn't a rescue mission launched immediately after the first phone call came in?"

You remember that, right?

and along those lines.....

The answer was....."it would have taken 12 hours to get there...and the attack lasted only x amount of hours"

So,......

Exactly how did they know during the first hour of the attack that it would end within 12 hours?

 

[Darkwind]

I recall that the original ODS rants about Benghazi accused the administration of not having enough security there in the first place.

Why did Bush allow 13 attacks to occur? Lack of security?

You recall incorrectly. The questions asked where, "Why wasn't a rescue mission launched immediately after the first phone call came in?"

You remember that, right?

and along those lines.....

The answer was....."it would have taken 12 hours to get there...and the attack lasted only x amount of hours"

So,......

Exactly how did they know during the first hour of the attack that it would end within 12 hours?

Yes, another question that needs an answer.

 

[NYcarbineer]

ZERO Benghazis happened under Bush.

No diplomats were killed due to the Bush administration refusing their requests for security.

'Diplomats' is a distinction without a difference.

Secondly, what proof do you have that none of the other 13 embassies never requested more security?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Were there allegations that Bush lied about any of the attacks to better his re-election?
No.

So the only question here is why aren't you outraged that Obama lied about Benghazi?

I recall that the original ODS rants about Benghazi accused the administration of not having enough security there in the first place.

Why did Bush allow 13 attacks to occur? Lack of security?

Lying spinner...

The concern was that the Ambassador in Benghazi asked several times for more security and the question was "why were those requests denied"

If you must spin in a debate, then you must be insecure in your position.

The embassies under Bush couldn't have had adequate security if they were successfully attacked could they?

 

[Claudette]

TA DA!!!!! Game, set and match!

sad clown; rant in bigger, bolder type; and announce you've "won"


the normal people here need a laugh

TA DA!!!!! Game, set and match!

Nope. Just your deflection of the Obama administrations handling of Benghazi.

Whatever did or didn't happen under Bush or any other President has not one damned thing to do with the Obama administrations failure to protect those at Benghazi.. A Benghazi where there was plenty of warning and State could have beefed up security or closed the damned embassy and pulled our people out like the Brits and the Red Cross. State did nothing.

Seems kinda funny that you can point out all of Bush's supposed failings but give Barry a pass.?

All you Barry lovers are biased hypocrites. You have no problem pointing out Bush's supposed failings but not one of you worthless idiots see a problem with Barry and what happened under his watch? A problem that could have been prevented? What a bunch of fucking hypocrites.

Apparantly if it happened when Bush was POTUS its bad.

If it happended and Barry is POTUS its okay and no big deal. I mean really. Who cares about four dead men. Four dead men who would be alive today if State had done its job. Really. Its only four men and I'm sure their families see it that way.


Talk about a fucking bunch of biased hypocrits. Your all fucking idiots.

 

[Oldstyle]

...aaaand thats why this isnt getting traction outside of the wingnut blogs. When someone asks a question (how or what did he lie about?) your entire logic folds and you go back to calling names

Do you REALLY not grasp the fact that Obama, Clinton, Rice and Carney lied about not knowing this was an attack carried out by Al Queda affiliated terrorists...that they knew without question within 24 hours of the attack taking place that this was not a protest over a YouTube video that escalated into violence and yet when the caskets of those men landed at Andrews Air Force base Clinton and Obama stood in front of those dead men and their families and blamed the attack on the video! That's so fucking despicable it's hard to fathom anyone being callous enough to do it. I mean how do you look those people in the eye like that and tell them a bullshit story about how their loved ones died?

 

[tinydancer]

You keep asking what I want and the answer is the same: Proof.

Got any or nah? You said he lied....I keep asking how and you keep responding with all outrage, gasps and OMG but no proof of anything

OK, proof has been given. Obama knew the truth at the time it happened. He sent Rice and he himself appeared weeks later blaming a video, which he knew had nothing to do with it.
So we know he lied intentionally.

So my question is, why aren't you outraged by this?

What is this truth Obama knew? and Why are you saying the video had nothing to do with it but you wont tell anyone what the attacks were about and who confirmed it?

Well there's this pesky little thing called testimony by both Leon Panetta and General Ham that they knew immediately that this was an organized terror attack and not a protest that got out of control.

 

[depotoo]

Seems there is new white house and state dept. email that has been withheld that is 7 pages long regarding media coverage and strategy.