GOP lies on Benghaz keep piling up

[JoeB131]

And if a frog had wings................

On 9/11, a coordinated attack with RPG's in an area that had a recent history of attacks................

Why is it that I sometimes think I need to rent a Back Hoe when you post on threads Joe..............

A co-ordinated attack that took place in the middle of a protest- over a video.

Still not seeing how that's Obama's fault, exactly.

Nothing unusual here Joe...........As you defend the Lies of Obama..........as you always do..................

So, the rebels, aka Islamic Fanatics, were blowing shit up all over the place there before the attack.......................

Yawn says the WH, no need of extra security...........They are just out having a blast, no real problems here..............

FOUR.............damn Obama, you sliced to the left again..............Want a mulligan............no, just put me down for par..........

Guy, Islamic Fanatics have been blowing shit up since the 1960's...

And the security of diplomatic missions is considered the responsibility of the HOST country. The fact that Libyan forces dropped their guns and ran was the main problem here.

 

[beagle9]

Benghazi - as either a cover up or a story of indifference while the president slept has no real truth to it.

I side with the Libs on this one.

There's a sodomized and murdered ambassador and his attache, and two dead SEALs who were taught a distress call would be responded to. This story is not one of indifference...this story is one of incompetence and cowardice.

I cringe at the thought that Susan Rice is still in some sort of representing job for this nation, because this woman was the mouth piece for the cover up without a doubt, and I can also understand why she did it instead of Hillary, so was Hillary being protected by Obama or excluded for reasons unknown ? It was a job of the up most importance to America, and we shouldn't have been played the fools on it. Was it a cover up that stunk to the highest levels once we found out that the video had nothing to do with the attack? I think so ! It makes one wonder if Obama is actually a serious sympathizer with the enemies of America in the world, and that is why we have seen all the strange goings on or happenings that we have seen taking place through out his run now, as well as out in the world. He seems to be as a king within this nation now, and this instead of a President subjected to the balance of powers in which we have in place.

 

[depotoo]

outside of war zones, there have been more deaths of Embassy, consulate employees under Obama.
Look into Mexico for one.

Emails reveal a flurry of changes to Benghazi talking points | KTVQ.com | Q2 | Billings, Montana
Benghazi Talking Points Memos: Documents Scrubbed of Terror Reference, Revised 12 Times: Exclusive | Video - ABC News
Emails reveal a flurry of changes to Benghazi talking points - Page 2 - CBS News
White House releases Benghazi e-mails
Congress wants answers on newly found Benghazi documents | The Cable

http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Libya-Progress-Report-Final-1.pdf
Reviews of the Benghazi Attack and Unanswered Questions | Committee on Oversight & Government Reform
Benghazi: Exposing Failure and Recognizing Courage | Committee on Oversight & Government Reform

Senate Hearing on U.S. Consulate Attack in Benghazi | C-SPAN
U.S. Consulate Attack in Benghazi, Libya - C-SPAN Video Library

 

[JimH52]

How many Americans died after W boasted this?

 

[Statistikhengst]

Peaceniks............

LOL

Bow to Obama when you do that................He can do no wrong.............and if you challenge him and call him a LIAR, you are bigot.........

What's new here................Again, with the violence there, why the hell didn't he increase security...............Even as the British pulled out of it...............

Almost every intel agency in the region stated it was a coordinated attack by terrorists, and on 9/11 at that...............

Do you guys believe in the tooth fairy still..................

You really don't know me, now do you...

lol...

Nope............

It shows.

 

[birddog]

A co-ordinated attack that took place in the middle of a protest- over a video.

Still not seeing how that's Obama's fault, exactly.

Nothing unusual here Joe...........As you defend the Lies of Obama..........as you always do..................

So, the rebels, aka Islamic Fanatics, were blowing shit up all over the place there before the attack.......................

Yawn says the WH, no need of extra security...........They are just out having a blast, no real problems here..............

FOUR.............damn Obama, you sliced to the left again..............Want a mulligan............no, just put me down for par..........

Guy, Islamic Fanatics have been blowing shit up since the 1960's...

And the security of diplomatic missions is considered the responsibility of the HOST country. The fact that Libyan forces dropped their guns and ran was the main problem here.

Again, hypothetically, if Chelsea Clinton had been the ambassador, the four men would not have died!

 

[Statistikhengst]

Nothing unusual here Joe...........As you defend the Lies of Obama..........as you always do..................

So, the rebels, aka Islamic Fanatics, were blowing shit up all over the place there before the attack.......................

Yawn says the WH, no need of extra security...........They are just out having a blast, no real problems here..............

FOUR.............damn Obama, you sliced to the left again..............Want a mulligan............no, just put me down for par..........

Guy, Islamic Fanatics have been blowing shit up since the 1960's...

And the security of diplomatic missions is considered the responsibility of the HOST country. The fact that Libyan forces dropped their guns and ran was the main problem here.

Again, hypothetically, if Chelsea Clinton had been the ambassador, the four men would not have died!

Are you saying that family members of presidential families would get preferential treatment?

They would already get extra security precisely BECAUSE they belong to a presidential family. You do understand this simple concept, right?

 

[JoeB131]

Nothing unusual here Joe...........As you defend the Lies of Obama..........as you always do..................

So, the rebels, aka Islamic Fanatics, were blowing shit up all over the place there before the attack.......................

Yawn says the WH, no need of extra security...........They are just out having a blast, no real problems here..............

FOUR.............damn Obama, you sliced to the left again..............Want a mulligan............no, just put me down for par..........

Guy, Islamic Fanatics have been blowing shit up since the 1960's...

And the security of diplomatic missions is considered the responsibility of the HOST country. The fact that Libyan forces dropped their guns and ran was the main problem here.

Again, hypothetically, if Chelsea Clinton had been the ambassador, the four men would not have died!

CHelsea Clinton would have never been appointed to such a key post.

This is what you all seem to forget, Ambassodor Stevens COULD have stayed in his nice safe embassy in Tripoli, but he CHOSE to visit the mission in Benghazi.

 

[birddog]

Guy, Islamic Fanatics have been blowing shit up since the 1960's...

And the security of diplomatic missions is considered the responsibility of the HOST country. The fact that Libyan forces dropped their guns and ran was the main problem here.

Again, hypothetically, if Chelsea Clinton had been the ambassador, the four men would not have died!

Are you saying that family members of presidential families would get preferential treatment?

They would already get extra security precisely BECAUSE they belong to a presidential family. You do understand this simple concept, right?

I see you have difficulty understanding "hypothetically!"

Just a reminder, Hillary was SOS.

 

[depotoo]

How many Americans died after W boasted this?

what the hell does Bush have to do with Benghazi?

 

[Unkotare]

How many Americans died after W boasted this?

He didn't "boast" that, you idiot.

 

[BDBoop]

How many Americans died after W boasted this?

He didn't "boast" that, you idiot.

The sign didn't - but his speech did.

 

[beagle9]

How many Americans died after W boasted this?

Grabbing at straws are we ?

 

[beagle9]

How many Americans died after W boasted this?

He didn't "boast" that, you idiot.

The sign didn't - but his speech did.

What's wrong with declaring in a multi faceted mission, as being a part of that huge mission (the main battle plan), as accomplished ? It was that we would have worked on the remaining parts just as well, and also completing them as missions accomplished in the multi-strategy used in the entire plan, but the libs and/or dems for political reasons back here at home, would have nothing of it, therefore they undermined the strategy of their nation at war at a critical time or timeline, and therefore jeopardized the lives of thousands of our soldiers in the field afterwards, and they did this with their undermining of our work on the entire multi-faceted missions that were still yet to come after the 1st part was completed as a success.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Yup.

Nope.



Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

Information provided by the Bush Administration. You conveniently left that part out. One thing we did know for sure was that it was Bin Laden who was behind 9/11. And Republicans let him go. Where is the outrage? And what exactly is Bush saying here? Can any Republicans explain it to me?

Girlfriend....was Bush in office in the 1990's? Idiot.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Girlfriend....was Bush in office in the 1990's? Idiot.

(Scratches head)

 

[Unkotare]

How many Americans died after W boasted this?

He didn't "boast" that, you idiot.

The sign didn't - but his speech did.

No it didn't.

CNN.com - Bush makes historic speech aboard warship - May. 1, 2003

 

[JohnL.Burke]

Guy, Islamic Fanatics have been blowing shit up since the 1960's...

And the security of diplomatic missions is considered the responsibility of the HOST country. The fact that Libyan forces dropped their guns and ran was the main problem here.

Again, hypothetically, if Chelsea Clinton had been the ambassador, the four men would not have died!

CHelsea Clinton would have never been appointed to such a key post.

This is what you all seem to forget, Ambassodor Stevens COULD have stayed in his nice safe embassy in Tripoli, but he CHOSE to visit the mission in Benghazi.

It's Stevens fault. Oh good lord. The defense of Obama just keeps getting more strained and weirder by the moment.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

A co-ordinated attack that took place in the middle of a protest- over a video.

Still not seeing how that's Obama's fault, exactly.

Nothing unusual here Joe...........As you defend the Lies of Obama..........as you always do..................

So, the rebels, aka Islamic Fanatics, were blowing shit up all over the place there before the attack.......................

Yawn says the WH, no need of extra security...........They are just out having a blast, no real problems here..............

FOUR.............damn Obama, you sliced to the left again..............Want a mulligan............no, just put me down for par..........

Guy, Islamic Fanatics have been blowing shit up since the 1960's...

And the security of diplomatic missions is considered the responsibility of the HOST country. The fact that Libyan forces dropped their guns and ran was the main problem here.

They weren't Libyan "forces"of course. The were members of the local tribal militias ( they were not government forces). Why would the U.S. hire Lybian tribesman? Why didn't our government give Stevens the protection he asked for? Who pushed the f*cking video? Why are the murderers allowed to walk free while giving interviews to the press? WTF?

 

[TooTall]

A ready reaction force??? Who gets that kind of a perk?

Perk, you've got to be kidding me.........The military can assign regional assets to ready reaction missions in pretty much any region of the world.....It doesn't take large assets to do so............And Libya had violent actions going on all over the place........Is Obama the CNC are the leader of a Boy Scout Troop.............

I do appreciate the appreciation on the subject at hand............

I simply don't like the Lies on this issue. Being x military, I expect the Gov't to do it's job and stop Lying especially when Americans die in situations.

And again, I don't expect a peachy world........It's not realistic.

I would definitely say that we screwed up, however, I do not see how you can say that Obama was directly responsible for security at a foreign embassy. Does it surprise you that the military did not immediately respond to requests for more security?

Obama appoints the Sec of State and all of the Ambassodors serving worldwide. The Consulates and Embassies are paid for and security requirements approved by the State Department.
Obama is the Commander in Chief and directs the military response when he gets a request from any Ambassador or Embassy.
Hope that helps you to see who is directly responsible for securty and a military response.