Looks like Obama was correct about Benghazi

[WelfareQueen]

Please define the difference between "act of terror" and "terrorist attack." Both indicate a conspiracy to act and planning by terrorist organizations. WTF is the difference?

And remember the NY Times claimed it was neither "an act of terror," or a "terrorist attack." This is after reporting for over a year it was both.


The left is twisting themselves into pretzels over this Benghazi shit. I have been laughing my ass off since yesterday reading all the convoluted logic. Half the arguments say terrorism had nothing to do with it and it was about a video....half say in was an act of terror (i.e. a planned terrorist attack).

Most are saying it is a non-issue after now spending two days and almost 60 pages defending a massive fuck up by Obama and Hillary. Again....I've been laughing my ass off.

Bnaghazi was a massive fuck up. Hillary has said several times the fuck up is 100% her responsibility. It was a coordinated terrorist attack. End of story. There is no amount of spin that will change those facts.

 

[Edgetho]

... I can assure you, that across the world, the embassies routinely raised security on that date, every year since that date. ...

Wait - you still think this happened at the Libyan Embassy?

Do you know how many consulates we have around the world?

Do you not know this happened at a temporary facility, and not even a consulate?

Do you know most of the officials there were working for the CIA, not State?

Do you know that building was basically a CIA operation?

I mean, basic stuff man. Learnz it.

You should keep on thinking the attacks carried out on 911 were spontaneous. Makes you look like the smartest water carrying squishpot for the democratic party there is.

Yes, the security is indeed heightened across the world, especially in the middle east on 9/11 every year.

The fact you do not know that, or seem to think that is ridiculous leaves me to one conclusion about you.

Do you actually work for this pathetic administration? You seem to fit right in with all of their arrogant know it all academia presumptions, bullshit, and incompetence. I mean, are you Hillary herself?

Hey, man!! You gots has your priorities in order!!

State Department Spent 4.5 Million for Embassy Art, Had No Money for Benghazi Security | FrontPage Magazine

The New York Times reported in 2009 that Art in Embassies spends about $4.5 million a year for permanent art acquisitions

Hillary Clinton will give five artists medals for embassy art - Los Angeles Times

What's a few dead white people here or there? Especially when they're former soldiers

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Obama could blame the attack on Global Warming and the Left would believe it

This is getting really tiresome. Glad you guys feel no real need to explain your positions and instead have unlimited amounts of time to blame liberals for all your problems. This is PROVEN to work! 2016 can't come fast enough!

More potoshops pics of Obama will be greatly appreciated.

Please post away and enjoy your next shellacking at the polls - you can always blame it on voter-fraud, reorganization of voting districts and Obama buying votes with unlimited EBT cards.

I love it!

Shellacking as what was witnessed in 2010?

I have to agree that 2016 can't come fast enough.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Take a look folks.

Both sides of the argument.

You have to stand in awe at how they deal with their cognitive dissonance. Let me clarify it for you. WHEN WE CLAIM it was an ACT OF TERROR, it means the attacks were planned. Meaning, it happened on the anniversary of 911, and it was far more organized for it to have been some spontaneous thing.

Also, the fact is Hillary failed to respond to the repeated requests for more security...


Let me know if you want more. The simple fact is NY Times is doing damage control for Hillary. Launching her 2016 campaign, and this will be her biggest problem.

The usual squishpots on the left will carry the water for these pathetic liars.

I cannot believe there are still morons on the left still parroting bullshit about spontaneous attacks, even after the administration later changed that narrative. It has been a long foregone conclusion that there nothing spontaneous about these.

Yet, here we are. One NY Times article, and they are all get off the hook.

Who quoted the NYT? Me? I am posting mostly from prior research I have already done on the subject. I have not read the NYT version of the events.


If you actually read what I had written, you would see that those were my words - not the Times'.

Yeah, when you claim Obama "steadfastly" claimed it was an ACT OF TERROR is you trying to obfuscate the point (through the liberal narrative as pushed by Candy Crowley) from the notion that Obama clearly said it was spontaneous as a result of a video.

In your other quote.....you say this:

The question was whether or not it was planed or spontaneous (or some planing)

Well, that is what the administration was claiming. You are saying it is most likely both. Meaning, even a "spontaneous attack" is an ACT OF TERROR. However, in this discussion or debate or controversy, there is a distinction. Meaning, if it was an ACT OF TERROR as we are saying, it means there was definite planning. Logistical steps being taken. If you want to believe there was no planning for the date 9/11 and it was simply something on the spur of moment that the administration was not prepared for, then fine. Of course, the fact it was on 911 and there was no heightened security should be indicative of this administration unreal incompetence, even if there were no warnings. I can assure you, that across the world, the embassies routinely raised security on that date, every year since that date.


The fact is there was not enough security and there were repeated requests. You trying to link the two together by claiming a spontaneous act is the same thing as ACT OF TERROR is you not getting the point, and attempting to take accountability from an adminsitration that let 4 people die for political expediency.

PERIOD.

Dude, I'm not trying to defend anyone, I'm pointing out that you're insane and that's about it.

Show me the planing, show me the Al-Qaeda connection - you are the one making this claim.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

This is getting really tiresome. Glad you guys feel no real need to explain your positions and instead have unlimited amounts of time to blame liberals for all your problems. This is PROVEN to work! 2016 can't come fast enough!

More potoshops pics of Obama will be greatly appreciated.

Please post away and enjoy your next shellacking at the polls - you can always blame it on voter-fraud, reorganization of voting districts and Obama buying votes with unlimited EBT cards.

I love it!

Shellacking as what was witnessed in 2010?

I have to agree that 2016 can't come fast enough.

Keep telling yourself that - enjoy the ass-whipping headed your way and by all means - stick to the crap issues like Benghazi ... that stuff is working!

 

[Theowl32]

Show me the planing, show me the Al-Qaeda connection - you are the one making this claim.

 

[Edgetho]

This is how Progo plays....

New reputation!
Hi, you have received -2727 reputation points from Pogo.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
so you cost me 900 and I cost you 2700 - I

Regards,
Pogo

Getting negged by a scumbag like Progo is a badge of honor.

He sent me two other PMs, as well. Along the same subject line.

I don't think I can post those without breaking Board rules. I can, however, post neg comments from him as they are not considered PMs.

I think I hurt his pussy and made him mad. Or cry. About the same.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

^^^^ Obama sleeping during the attacks. Proof positive that he really is a Mooslum.


Even more evidence....

The Mayans knew about Obozo CENTURIES ago!!!

Obumbler sawing ZZZZ's while America is under attack....

Yes, I've finally snapped!!!

 

[Edgetho]

Who quoted the NYT? Me? I am posting mostly from prior research I have already done on the subject. I have not read the NYT version of the events.


If you actually read what I had written, you would see that those were my words - not the Times'.

Yeah, when you claim Obama "steadfastly" claimed it was an ACT OF TERROR is you trying to obfuscate the point (through the liberal narrative as pushed by Candy Crowley) from the notion that Obama clearly said it was spontaneous as a result of a video.

In your other quote.....you say this:

The question was whether or not it was planed or spontaneous (or some planing)

Well, that is what the administration was claiming. You are saying it is most likely both. Meaning, even a "spontaneous attack" is an ACT OF TERROR. However, in this discussion or debate or controversy, there is a distinction. Meaning, if it was an ACT OF TERROR as we are saying, it means there was definite planning. Logistical steps being taken. If you want to believe there was no planning for the date 9/11 and it was simply something on the spur of moment that the administration was not prepared for, then fine. Of course, the fact it was on 911 and there was no heightened security should be indicative of this administration unreal incompetence, even if there were no warnings. I can assure you, that across the world, the embassies routinely raised security on that date, every year since that date.


The fact is there was not enough security and there were repeated requests. You trying to link the two together by claiming a spontaneous act is the same thing as ACT OF TERROR is you not getting the point, and attempting to take accountability from an adminsitration that let 4 people die for political expediency.

PERIOD.

Dude, I'm not trying to defend anyone, I'm pointing out that you're insane and that's about it.

Show me the planing, show me the Al-Qaeda connection - you are the one making this claim.

Why don't you do some reading outside your 'happy place' in the DISGUSTING FILTH of the LSM.

Here's just one piece.

The New York Times? Benghazi Revisionism | FrontPage Magazine

It's a complete and utter lie. And everybody knows it.... Except for typically uninformed and downright stupid dimocrap scumbags on the left like you.

Proving you are a liar and a dirtbag is no longer of any interest to anyone with an IQ.

It just goes without saying that all dimocraps are.

The article is a lie, and the whole thinking world knows it.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

This is getting really tiresome. Glad you guys feel no real need to explain your positions and instead have unlimited amounts of time to blame liberals for all your problems. This is PROVEN to work! 2016 can't come fast enough!

More potoshops pics of Obama will be greatly appreciated.

Please post away and enjoy your next shellacking at the polls - you can always blame it on voter-fraud, reorganization of voting districts and Obama buying votes with unlimited EBT cards.

I love it!

Shellacking as what was witnessed in 2010?

I have to agree that 2016 can't come fast enough.

Keep telling yourself that - enjoy the ass-whipping headed your way and by all means - stick to the crap issues like Benghazi ... that stuff is working!

Keep telling yourself that Benghazi isn't going to be a factor in Hillary's election campaign. Her "what difference at this point does it make" comment will be playing non-stop. Four Americans lost their lives and she doesn't care what caused it.

The reason Hillary will not win in 2016 can be summed up in one word...China.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Why don't you do some reading outside your 'happy place' in the DISGUSTING FILTH of the LSM.

Here's just one piece.

The New York Times? Benghazi Revisionism | FrontPage Magazine

It's a complete and utter lie. And everybody knows it.... Except for typically uninformed and downright stupid dimocrap scumbags on the left like you.

Proving you are a liar and a dirtbag is no longer of any interest to anyone with an IQ.

It just goes without saying that all dimocraps are.

The article is a lie, and the whole thinking world knows it.

Once again instead of any actually substance to an argument, more crap about: Me, the lying liberal media, Elvis Presley's ghost, anything but the topic.

 

[rightwinger]

So...What is the GOP version of the Benghazi attacks?

It was an international AlQaida conspiracy planned to coincide with the 9-11 anniversary
The video had nothing to do with it


Both proven to be wrong

 

[Theowl32]

Why don't you do some reading outside your 'happy place' in the DISGUSTING FILTH of the LSM.

Here's just one piece.

The New York Times? Benghazi Revisionism | FrontPage Magazine

It's a complete and utter lie. And everybody knows it.... Except for typically uninformed and downright stupid dimocrap scumbags on the left like you.

Proving you are a liar and a dirtbag is no longer of any interest to anyone with an IQ.

It just goes without saying that all dimocraps are.

The article is a lie, and the whole thinking world knows it.

Once again instead of any actually substance to an argument, more crap about: Me, the lying liberal media, Elvis Presley's ghost, anything but the topic.

I have added substance. I distinguished the difference between act of terror, and a spontaneous act as defined by the administration.

There has been more than enough proof about what this was all about.

Political expediency.

Stop acting like anyone like you the other ones have provided anything of substance other than the Hillary water carrying rag known as the NY Times.

Please, stop thinking you are the smartest one in the room while being in a perpetual ignorant brainwashed mesmerized state.

 

[Edgetho]

Shellacking as what was witnessed in 2010?

I have to agree that 2016 can't come fast enough.

Keep telling yourself that - enjoy the ass-whipping headed your way and by all means - stick to the crap issues like Benghazi ... that stuff is working!

Keep telling yourself that Benghazi isn't going to be a factor in Hillary's election campaign. Her "what difference at this point does it make" comment will be playing non-stop. Four Americans lost their lives and she doesn't care what caused it.

The reason Hillary will not win in 2016 can be summed up in one word...China.

Setting the lies by the New Yawk Slimes aside.....

The major questions that need to be answered are still, "Why weren't security forces assigned to Benghazi when the Ambassador had asked for them BEFORE the attack. And why was there no attempt to rescue the men being murdered by Islamist scum."

THAT is the question. I care about who did it because I want them DEAD>

But anybody here who thinks that a bunch of pissed-off amateurs pulled off an attack like that is just FUCKING STUPID. I will tell you to your face that you are stupid, I will write it on your fucking forehead, I will tell your mama, your daddy and your baby sister that you are one stupid motherfucker.

AMATEURS DON'T PULL OF ATTACKS LIKE THAT.

It just doesn't happen.

And if you (I almost typed 'people' but you're not, you're scumbags) scumbags want to believe it was all just some ragheads out for some revenge over a fucking Video, go ahead. You ARE that stupid.

But, REGARDLESS of who did it.... Where was the help? Why wasn't the security that Ambassador Stevens asked for in place?

The matter of 'who did it' will be unimportant in the 2016 election.

The fatass scrunt, Hitlery saying "What difference doesn it make" will sink her.

Because she, like every other dimocrap, is a scumbag.

ALL of you.

And no, I'm not kidding

 

[Edgetho]

Why don't you do some reading outside your 'happy place' in the DISGUSTING FILTH of the LSM.

Here's just one piece.

The New York Times? Benghazi Revisionism | FrontPage Magazine

It's a complete and utter lie. And everybody knows it.... Except for typically uninformed and downright stupid dimocrap scumbags on the left like you.

Proving you are a liar and a dirtbag is no longer of any interest to anyone with an IQ.

It just goes without saying that all dimocraps are.

The article is a lie, and the whole thinking world knows it.

Once again instead of any actually substance to an argument, more crap about: Me, the lying liberal media, Elvis Presley's ghost, anything but the topic.

I have added substance. I distinguished the difference between act of terror, and a spontaneous act as defined by the administration.

There has been more than enough proof about what this was all about.

Political expediency.

Stop acting like anyone like you the other ones have provided anything of substance other than the Hillary water carrying rag known as the NY Times.

Please, stop thinking you are the smartest one in the room while being in a perpetual ignorant brainwashed mesmerized state.

Former Guantanamo detainee was on ground in Benghazi during terror attack, source says | Fox News

A former Guantanamo Bay detainee with Al Qaeda ties was in Benghazi the night of the Sept. 11 attack, according to a source on the ground in Libya.

The source told Fox News that ex-detainee Sufian bin Qumu, who is suspected of running camps in eastern Libya where some of the assailants trained, is also a "respected member" of Ansar al-Sharia -- one of the Islamist groups identified in State Department email traffic two hours after the attack.

Two sources familiar with the investigation, when asked about bin Qumu's whereabouts the night of the attack, did not dispute the claim he was in Benghazi.

While it is not clear whether bin Qumu was directing the assault, his security file from Guantanamo may be revealing. Having already trained in Usama bin Laden's camps, in 1998 bin Qumu joined the Taliban in Pakistan and "communicated with likely extremist elements via radio during this period indicating a position of leadership," the file shows.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

So much for the Republican campaign against Hillary

A Deadly Mix in Benghazi - The New York Times

Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault.

So it wasn't terrorist attack. That leaves it to "violence at work place", I guess.

No I believe this administration had tried to refer to such events as a "man made disaster". Something about the word terrorism was apparently believed that it might be construed as being just too offensive.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Once again instead of any actually substance to an argument, more crap about: Me, the lying liberal media, Elvis Presley's ghost, anything but the topic.

I have added substance. I distinguished the difference between act of terror, and a spontaneous act as defined by the administration.

There has been more than enough proof about what this was all about.

Political expediency.

Stop acting like anyone like you the other ones have provided anything of substance other than the Hillary water carrying rag known as the NY Times.

Please, stop thinking you are the smartest one in the room while being in a perpetual ignorant brainwashed mesmerized state.

Former Guantanamo detainee was on ground in Benghazi during terror attack, source says | Fox News

A former Guantanamo Bay detainee with Al Qaeda ties was in Benghazi the night of the Sept. 11 attack, according to a source on the ground in Libya.

The source told Fox News that ex-detainee Sufian bin Qumu, who is suspected of running camps in eastern Libya where some of the assailants trained, is also a "respected member" of Ansar al-Sharia -- one of the Islamist groups identified in State Department email traffic two hours after the attack.

Two sources familiar with the investigation, when asked about bin Qumu's whereabouts the night of the attack, did not dispute the claim he was in Benghazi.

While it is not clear whether bin Qumu was directing the assault, his security file from Guantanamo may be revealing. Having already trained in Usama bin Laden's camps, in 1998 bin Qumu joined the Taliban in Pakistan and "communicated with likely extremist elements via radio during this period indicating a position of leadership," the file shows.

^^^^ "Substance!"

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Top News: The attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi that led to the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans was not planned by Al Qaeda, but was coordinated by local militias and fueled by anger over a video that mocked Islam. According to an investigation by the New York Times, the U.S. wrongly emphasized threats from international terrorist organizations over volatility among local Libyan militias, and relied too heavily on supposed allies to give warning of possible attacks. Analysts also missed signs of building unrest in the days before the attack.

The prime suspect in the attack, which hit both the diplomatic mission and the CIA annex, is Ahmed Abu Khattala, an eccentric local militia leader who had been critical of U.S. interests in Libya. Efforts to arrest Khattala have been frustrated by other militia leaders, some of whom are friendly to the U.S., closing ranks around him.

The investigation reveals that neither of the two dominant narratives that emerged after the attack last Sept. 11 captured how events transpired: there was no international plot, but the attack wasn't entirely spontaneous. Rather, there were simmering threats that were misread or ignored, and a misunderstanding of the dangers posed by local strongmen.

So...What is the GOP version of the Benghazi attacks?

It was an international AlQaida conspiracy planned to coincide with the 9-11 anniversary
The video had nothing to do with it


Both proven to be wrong

It's all over the place. The poor wingnuts... Al Qaeda Not Involved in Benghazi Attack | Foreign Policy

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Once again instead of any actually substance to an argument, more crap about: Me, the lying liberal media, Elvis Presley's ghost, anything but the topic.

I have added substance. I distinguished the difference between act of terror, and a spontaneous act as defined by the administration.

There has been more than enough proof about what this was all about.

Political expediency.

Stop acting like anyone like you the other ones have provided anything of substance other than the Hillary water carrying rag known as the NY Times.

Please, stop thinking you are the smartest one in the room while being in a perpetual ignorant brainwashed mesmerized state.

Former Guantanamo detainee was on ground in Benghazi during terror attack, source says | Fox News

A former Guantanamo Bay detainee with Al Qaeda ties was in Benghazi the night of the Sept. 11 attack, according to a source on the ground in Libya.

The source told Fox News that ex-detainee Sufian bin Qumu, who is suspected of running camps in eastern Libya where some of the assailants trained, is also a "respected member" of Ansar al-Sharia -- one of the Islamist groups identified in State Department email traffic two hours after the attack.

Two sources familiar with the investigation, when asked about bin Qumu's whereabouts the night of the attack, did not dispute the claim he was in Benghazi.

While it is not clear whether bin Qumu was directing the assault, his security file from Guantanamo may be revealing. Having already trained in Usama bin Laden's camps, in 1998 bin Qumu joined the Taliban in Pakistan and "communicated with likely extremist elements via radio during this period indicating a position of leadership," the file shows.

One guy with alleged ties to al qaeda? Wow!

 

[Edgetho]

Top News: The attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi that led to the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans was not planned by Al Qaeda, but was coordinated by local militias and fueled by anger over a video that mocked Islam. According to an investigation by the New York Times, the U.S. wrongly emphasized threats from international terrorist organizations over volatility among local Libyan militias, and relied too heavily on supposed allies to give warning of possible attacks. Analysts also missed signs of building unrest in the days before the attack.

The prime suspect in the attack, which hit both the diplomatic mission and the CIA annex, is Ahmed Abu Khattala, an eccentric local militia leader who had been critical of U.S. interests in Libya. Efforts to arrest Khattala have been frustrated by other militia leaders, some of whom are friendly to the U.S., closing ranks around him.

The investigation reveals that neither of the two dominant narratives that emerged after the attack last Sept. 11 captured how events transpired: there was no international plot, but the attack wasn't entirely spontaneous. Rather, there were simmering threats that were misread or ignored, and a misunderstanding of the dangers posed by local strongmen.

So...What is the GOP version of the Benghazi attacks?

It was an international AlQaida conspiracy planned to coincide with the 9-11 anniversary
The video had nothing to do with it


Both proven to be wrong

It's all over the place. The poor wingnuts... Al Qaeda Not Involved in Benghazi Attack | Foreign Policy

Let me tell you something, scumbag....

Amateurs don't engage in an hours-long, running gun-battle with former Navy SEALs.

If you think they do, I know several that would love to teach a scumbag like you a lesson in that regard.

You are truly a stupid motherfucker.

But.... You're a dimocrap. What else is new