Looks like Obama was correct about Benghazi

[Theowl32]

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

So was it an act of terror or spontaneous event? You seem to be really all fixated on the Al qaida link.

The NYT, reminiscent of Ted Koppel's visit to Vietnam to locate an eye witness to John Kerry's shooting of a young boy, recently resurrected the Obama's video story & said al Qaeda had nothing to do with the Benghazi attacks.

What the NYT's story ignores is that one of the assassins that killed Sadat (Aboud Al-Zomar) was released from prison after Mubarak was deposed in Egypt.

Here's what al-Zomar said about Egyptian physician Ayman al-Zawahiri, who took over leadership of al Qaeda after bin Laden was killed.

Al-Zumar claims al-Zawahiri is a far more effective leader than bin Laden ever was. He states that Al-Zawahiri is now organizing & inciting terror movements throughout the Middle East. Plus, he’s unifying & consolidating diverse militant Islamic groups all over the region with his vision of “jihadist holy war”.

But for those that try to obfuscate & obscure the truth about the Benghazi attacks, this is not about responsibility & accountability. And it's certainly not about truth or falsity. Instead, it's all about the left's quest for power & control. And truth & accountability make their quest for power & control more difficult.

So, expect to hear more Dem spins & more Dem lies in the lead-ups to the 2014 & 2016 elections.

What is the maximum number of degrees of separation between the locals who attacked the embassy and Al Quaeda to count as Al Queada involvement? Hopefully it's less than 6 degrees!


Either way, I am trying to figure out how this proves Obama right. He said it was an act of terror, didn't he? Yeah, he did. Oh wait, no he really didn't. Wait, didn't he?


Fucking liberals.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

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

ALL of you.

And no, I'm not kidding

DOWN GOES MAD CABBIE!!!!

The bitter taste of defeat.






.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

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.

^

Yes.

Let us all now pretend that "The Paper of Record" is actually reporting "news" instead of serving as a propaganda ministry for Obumbler and Shrillary.

 

[Mertex]

I had forgotten about that.

Looks like they (rw) conveniently forgot that, too.....

I see the far left will believe anything that Obama tells them to believe.

Ha,ha, Obama isn't the one that reported the news.....it was the New York Times, ijit.

 

[Mertex]

Whoa and we will do battle up and coming.

What dumb fuck couldnt figure out that Ottawa didn't need an extra guy?

What dumb mother freaking idiot decided to hire Libyan rebels as security guards?

Did you miss something?

You can't cut spending on security and then bitch about why security wasn't increased.....logic...use logic....


Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) said today that he voted to cut funding for U.S. embassy security amid political attacks from Republicans that the Obama administration did not do enough to secure the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya that was attacked last month.
But hidden beneath the GOP campaign is the fact that House Republicans voted to cut nearly $300 million from the U.S. embassy security budget. When asked if he voted to cut the funds this morning on CNN, Chaffetz said, “Absolutely“:
GOP Rep: I 'Absolutely' Voted To Cut Funding For Embassy Security | ThinkProgress

Well this will freak you out.I'm a huge Hillory fan. She's my guy. I don't know how to explain this. And boy oh boy it doesn't look good when you print it out.

I'm sorry.....I really didn't understand your post. You like Hillary, but you think that she messed up on Benghazi? That's funny.....George W. Bush had more embassy attacks and the rw still love him.......voted him 2nd to Obama as most admired....bwahahaha......and his Benghazi was the original 911 in New York, and there were more than 4 people killed there....you rw's slay me.

 

[Edgetho]

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!

Nobody said al Qaeda itself was directly involved, but that Ansar al Sharia was. And they are an affiliate of al Qaeda.

What you're saying, what you're trying to get us to believe (because you're a lying scumbag) is that a bunch of goat-fucking ragheads got some hashish somewhere and wanted some revenge for a bad (really bad) Video about Muhammed The Pedophile and Murderer.

That these amateurs, lobbed five mortar rounds at a building from (at least) a mile away and hit it three out of the five rounds.

That these 'amateurs' got into a running gun-battle with former SEALs and scared the Libyan Militia into hiding..

Are you really that stupid?

Unfortunately, I believe the answer is 'Yes, you are'

You're a dimocrap. That requires a small brain and the lack of critical thought.

 

[paperview]

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

*sigh*

Another one spreading the false story it was an "hours long" attack.

From sworn testimony
ADMIRAL DEMPSEY: You know, it wasn't a seven-hour battle.

It was two 20-minute battles separated by about six hours.

The idea that this was one continuous event is just incorrect.

And the nearest -- for example, the nearest aircraft -- armed aircraft, happened to be in Djibouti, the distance from Djibouti to Benghazi is the distance from Washington, D.C., to Los Angeles. There is some significant physics involved. And the time available, given the intelligence available, I have great confidence in reporting to the American people that we were appropriately responsive given what we knew at the time. [CNN, State of the Union, 2/3/13]

Two separate attacks. Two twenty minute battles. Some were part of the planned attack,

some were spurred by the video,

some were there to loot,

some were there as the fervor and intensity grew to show their support for their angry countrymen,

and some were there for other reasons -- you know, when mobs converge, there are a multiplicity of motivators that drive different individuals.

Weird, I know, huh?

 

[Mertex]

The NYT's is just putting out a smoke screen to get the news off of Obamacare for a couple of days--that no one believes anyway. Sworn congressional testimony by those in security and others at this compound says much different.

You mean that no rightwinger believes.....right? Just thought I should fix it for you.

 

[Theowl32]

You know what? I think lefties like rightwinger think that if there was no Al Qaeda link, then that means it was perfectly ok for the administration to ignore repeated requests for more security, and that it automatically means it was a totally spontaneous event.


I think they think that. Am I wrong? They cannot possibly be this stupid, right?

 

[Mertex]

We have a thread on this already. What did you need people to pay attention to you?

You mean the one that the right jumped on to say it wasn't true? Bwahaha.....y'all hope it isn't true....but, it doesn't look that way. You can stay over there on the other thread and deny it all you want....you have plenty of company over there....all the whiners.

 

[rightwinger]

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.

Good luck with that....

Misrepresenting what she was saying got you nowhere with Obama in 2012 and will get you nowhere against Hillary in 2016

 

[tinydancer]

It is a sad day on the planet where boarder whores are willing to lie for nothing. You know who you are.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

And to add:


DEMPSEY: You know, it wasn't a seven-hour battle.

It was two 20-minute battles separated by about six hours.

The idea that this was one continuous event is just incorrect.

And the nearest -- for example, the nearest aircraft -- armed aircraft, happened to be in Djibouti, the distance from Djibouti to Benghazi is the distance from Washington, D.C., to Los Angeles. There is some significant physics involved. And the time available, given the intelligence available, I have great confidence in reporting to the American people that we were appropriately responsive given what we knew at the time. [CNN, State of the Union, 2/3/13]

Two separate attacks. Some were part of the planned attack,

some were spurred by the video,

some were there to loot,

some were there as the ferver and intensity grew to show their support for their angry countrymen,

and some were there for other reasons -- you know, when mobs converge, there are a multiplicity of motivators that drive different individuals.

Weird, I know, huh?

It was two 20 minute battles, yet ambassador Stevens found no justification or means to escape during an engagement that WASN'T continuous. Wow this just gets better, than just letting the excuse lay on merely stating it was an outrage over a video.

The question still remains though. The fact that the anniversary of 9-11 was coming, and the significant meaning behind such an event, why did the President opt to not add more protection to those embassies in volatile locations where extremists might seize an opportunity? If the left wants to use the excuse of Obama's military spending cuts, why not simply close these embassies down and have the Americans transferred to a safer location? Obviously 9-11 wasn't just simply a coincidence random attack date as the left may like to claim it was. President Obama left his guard down, and allowed Americans to remain in harms way if he couldn't provide appropriate measures of protection.

The left can use their song and dance of excuses, change their stories as many times as they wish, but the unfortunate blunder associated with that attack still remains on President Obama's shoulders and his administration.

 

[Mertex]

You know what? I think lefties like rightwinger think that is there was no Al Qaeda link, then that means it was perfectly ok for the administration to ignore repeated requests for more security, and that it automatically means it was a totally spontaneous event.

You mean like the right wing Congressmen who all voted against the bill to raise the funding for security?

Yeah.....the GOP wanted to ignore requests for more security....now they're bitching and blaming the Democrats for not ignoring their refusal to increase funding.....y'all can't make up your minds.....now you don't want it, now you want it.....too much KoolAid.

I think they think that. Am I wrong? They cannot possibly be this stupid, right?

The only ones that are stupid are the ones that agreed with their Congressmen to not raise the funding for security and are now bitching that the funding for security was not raised......ijits.

GOP Rep: I 'Absolutely' Voted To Cut Funding For Embassy Security | ThinkProgress

 

[paperview]

...why did the President opt to not add more protection to those embassies....

Another one who thinks this happened at an Embassy.

Not only was it not an Embassy, it wasn't even a Consulate.

& it was a freakin' CIA operation. Ferchissakes, this gets old.

 

[Edgetho]

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

*sigh*

Another one spreading the false story it was an "hours long" attack.

From sworn testimony
ADMIRAL DEMPSEY: You know, it wasn't a seven-hour battle.

It was two 20-minute battles separated by about six hours.

The idea that this was one continuous event is just incorrect.

And the nearest -- for example, the nearest aircraft -- armed aircraft, happened to be in Djibouti, the distance from Djibouti to Benghazi is the distance from Washington, D.C., to Los Angeles. There is some significant physics involved. And the time available, given the intelligence available, I have great confidence in reporting to the American people that we were appropriately responsive given what we knew at the time. [CNN, State of the Union, 2/3/13]

Two separate attacks. Two twenty minute battles. Some were part of the planned attack,

some were spurred by the video,

some were there to loot,

some were there as the fervor and intensity grew to show their support for their angry countrymen,

and some were there for other reasons -- you know, when mobs converge, there are a multiplicity of motivators that drive different individuals.

Weird, I know, huh?

What 'planned attack'? Didn't the New Yawk Slimes say there was no planned attack?

That it was just a few pissed off ragheads out for a little revenge?

And yes, there was an hours-long, running battle despite what the DISGUSTING FILTH in the LSM is telling you.

Which is one of the main resons you're so ignorant..... You buy into their bullshit. Nobody makes you, you do it because it's easy, it's popular, it's what all the kids are doing.

If you want to learn....

How the Benghazi Attack Unfolded - Timeline - WSJ.com

If you want to remain stupid? Please do so. I'm sure all your friends will appreciate it

 

[Dot Com]

Times Deals Another Blow to Benghazi Truthers -- Daily Intelligencer

 

[tinydancer]

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.

Good luck with that....

Misrepresenting what she was saying got you nowhere with Obama in 2012 and will get you nowhere against Hillary in 2016

Can I give you a heads up here? Don't tie her to Benghazi. That's Chicago trying to spoil her chances and this is from a died in the wool conservative.

 

[Dot Com]

...why did the President opt to not add more protection to those embassies....

Another one who thinks this happened at an Embassy.

Not only was it not an Embassy, it wasn't even a Consulate.

& it was a freakin' CIA operation. Ferchissakes, this gets old.

where do these rw'ers get their news from oh yeah!! Sean/Rush

 

[Theowl32]

No Al Qaeda link?

So how exactly does this let Hillary off the hook?

Please, please explain.