Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Benghazi is what happens when you don't pay attention to warning signs.
The same kind of thing happened in Somalia when I was there. We kept sending word up the chain that we needed this or needed that in order to defend ourselves and they refused. Then on October 3, 1993 all of the neglect of the Clinton Administration resulted in the unnecessary deaths of 18 Rangers and Delta members along with the wounding of nearly 100 members of Taskforce Ranger. Instead of allowing us to have armored vehicles like every other country there we were forced to use unarmored Hummers and flatbed trucks. Fact is Hillary doesn't care if a few people die because of her lack of preparation. All she cares about is being the first woman to become president of the United States.
Or we could have not been there at all... that would have been a great idea.
We were there because like Americans always do, we try to help those who are suffering. Somalia was in the middle of a civil war and people were dying, so of course America had to chip in and help. By the time we left the starvation had ended and the people there were getting back to murdering anyone who was not Muslim as they always do.
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.
That's it...I carried your water longer than just about every conservative on this forum.
This is the last straw. For you to cling to this story by NYT and give it immediate credence over all of the investigation by private and government agencies in multiple countries - dismiss all of them, for this story - can only be because you want it to be true.
You are as dismissible as Sallow now.
Well, the New York Times did what Darryl Issa refused to do... actually do an investigation and talk to people.
But Congressman Issa (R-Koch Brothers) was just out there stirring up shit without basis, and wonders why no one takes him seriously.
That's it...I carried your water longer than just about every conservative on this forum.
This is the last straw. For you to cling to this story by NYT and give it immediate credence over all of the investigation by private and government agencies in multiple countries - dismiss all of them, for this story - can only be because you want it to be true.
You are as dismissible as Sallow now.
Well, the New York Times did what Darryl Issa refused to do... actually do an investigation and talk to people.
But Congressman Issa (R-Koch Brothers) was just out there stirring up shit without basis, and wonders why no one takes him seriously.
Strange how the New York Times is granted better access to intelligence from the Obama Administration than Congressional investigators.
Why is that? Could it be because it allows the White House to control the story?
Well, the New York Times did what Darryl Issa refused to do... actually do an investigation and talk to people.
But Congressman Issa (R-Koch Brothers) was just out there stirring up shit without basis, and wonders why no one takes him seriously.
Strange how the New York Times is granted better access to intelligence from the Obama Administration than Congressional investigators.
Why is that? Could it be because it allows the White House to control the story?
No, not really.
The NYT actually wanted to DO an investigation.
Issa wants to get face time on Faux News.
That's it...I carried your water longer than just about every conservative on this forum.
This is the last straw. For you to cling to this story by NYT and give it immediate credence over all of the investigation by private and government agencies in multiple countries - dismiss all of them, for this story - can only be because you want it to be true.
You are as dismissible as Sallow now.
Well, the New York Times did what Darryl Issa refused to do... actually do an investigation and talk to people.
But Congressman Issa (R-Koch Brothers) was just out there stirring up shit without basis, and wonders why no one takes him seriously.
Strange how the New York Times is granted better access to intelligence from the Obama Administration than Congressional investigators.
Why is that? Could it be because it allows the White House to control the story?
who owns the NYT folks?
who owns the NYT folks?
That's irrelevant to the discussion. But then again you're not relevant to this discussion either.
who owns the NYT folks?
That's irrelevant to the discussion. But then again you're not relevant to this discussion either.
No shit...quite disappointing she was allowed to come back.
Right back to the same crap..literally taking over threads with posting multiple posts in a row in the same damn thread.
Like sand in your shoes.
Issa & the GOP. How much money he/them spend this time?
. Fifteen months after Mr. Stevens’s death, the question of responsibility remains a searing issue in Washington, framed by two contradictory story lines.
One has it that the video, which was posted on YouTube, inspired spontaneous street protests that got out of hand. This version, based on early intelligence reports, was initially offered publicly by Susan E. Rice, who is now Mr. Obama’s national security adviser.
The other, favored by Republicans, holds that Mr. Stevens died in a carefully planned assault by Al Qaeda to mark the anniversary of its strike on the United States 11 years before. Republicans have accused the Obama administration of covering up evidence of Al Qaeda’s role to avoid undermining the president’s claim that the group has been decimated, in part because of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.
The investigation by The Times shows that the reality in Benghazi was different, and murkier, than either of those story lines suggests. Benghazi was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests. The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs.
This is the left's attempt to clean up
Benghanzi before Hillary's presidential run.
It will probably work unless the republicans pull their heads out of their bottoms.
. Fifteen months after Mr. Stevenss death, the question of responsibility remains a searing issue in Washington, framed by two contradictory story lines.
One has it that the video, which was posted on YouTube, inspired spontaneous street protests that got out of hand. This version, based on early intelligence reports, was initially offered publicly by Susan E. Rice, who is now Mr. Obamas national security adviser.
The other, favored by Republicans, holds that Mr. Stevens died in a carefully planned assault by Al Qaeda to mark the anniversary of its strike on the United States 11 years before. Republicans have accused the Obama administration of covering up evidence of Al Qaedas role to avoid undermining the presidents claim that the group has been decimated, in part because of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.
The investigation by The Times shows that the reality in Benghazi was different, and murkier, than either of those story lines suggests. Benghazi was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests. The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs.
Also note: the LIE that the attack was based on a video caused protests that got MORE PEOPLE KILLED and terrorized the filmmaker who was forced to go into hiding.
I understand that the strategy may have been to "take the thunder" away from the terrorists and blame it on something else to keep from fueling victory statements or more anti-US campaigns, attacks or other such reactions to incite further violence.
But even the diversion tactic DID incite violence and cost lives, and the freedom/security of people falsely blamed for inciting this with their video. the other actors were also threatened. And the families were insulted about being lied to.
It had other costs.
Not just because of the initial LIE, but the subsequent denial that caused even further distrust, lack of respect and confidence in trusting the Obama Administration.
It will take a lot more to repair that DAMAGE caused by the denial, and especially
this projection of blame on the very people who protested BEING LIED TO. Purely for politics.
How can you blame the victims for not trusting this administration to be truthful and responsible?
why shouldn't Obama take responsibility for lying and creating this problem or making it worse?
Since when do you blame the people for reacting to lies and denial afterward?
Really?
My hope is the NYTimes False story starts the unraveling of the truth about Benghazi.
I Will NEVER Forget Benghazi where Americans were left to die & the POS POTUS went to Vegas.
Calling it a false story without backing it up with links....links to Al Qaeda just proves that the GOPers are so angry that their only hope to attack Hillary is dissolving into thin air.
As for your last comment, but you sure were able to forget the 3000 that died in NY on 9/ll, and the 4000+ that died defending a worthless war due to Booooooosh.....that's unbelievable!
What was so special about the 4 that died in Benghazi that the 7000 that died due to Bush's 9/ll didn't have?
Benghazi is what happens when you don't pay attention to warning signs.
The same kind of thing happened in Somalia when I was there. We kept sending word up the chain that we needed this or needed that in order to defend ourselves and they refused. Then on October 3, 1993 all of the neglect of the Clinton Administration resulted in the unnecessary deaths of 18 Rangers and Delta members along with the wounding of nearly 100 members of Taskforce Ranger. Instead of allowing us to have armored vehicles like every other country there we were forced to use unarmored Hummers and flatbed trucks. Fact is Hillary doesn't care if a few people die because of her lack of preparation. All she cares about is being the first woman to become president of the United States.
Well, the New York Times did what Darryl Issa refused to do... actually do an investigation and talk to people.
But Congressman Issa (R-Koch Brothers) was just out there stirring up shit without basis, and wonders why no one takes him seriously.
Strange how the New York Times is granted better access to intelligence from the Obama Administration than Congressional investigators.
Why is that? Could it be because it allows the White House to control the story?
Unfortunately you are right.
It is a sad, sad thing when an organization as big and important as the NYT allows themselves to become an arm for a political party - but that is unarguably what they are.
When the Iraq war was being fought under GWB - daily negative stories - daily. As well as consistent stories about Abu Ghirab...then Afghanistan.
TODAY - the middle east has never been this f*cked up. It is a disaster throughout the entire region - and yet - where are the negative stories? Where are the "DAY 500" stories - the casualties stories...where?
Strange how the New York Times is granted better access to intelligence from the Obama Administration than Congressional investigators.
Why is that? Could it be because it allows the White House to control the story?
Unfortunately you are right.
It is a sad, sad thing when an organization as big and important as the NYT allows themselves to become an arm for a political party - but that is unarguably what they are.
When the Iraq war was being fought under GWB - daily negative stories - daily. As well as consistent stories about Abu Ghirab...then Afghanistan.
TODAY - the middle east has never been this f*cked up. It is a disaster throughout the entire region - and yet - where are the negative stories? Where are the "DAY 500" stories - the casualties stories...where?
Has it occured to you the reason why the Media turned on Bush over Iraq is because Bush lied to them?
March 16, 2003 Meet the Press interview of Vice President Dick Cheney, held less than a week before the Iraq War began, host Tim Russert reported that "every analysis said this war itself would cost about $80 billion, recovery of Baghdad, perhaps of Iraq, about $10 billion per year. We should expect as American citizens that this would cost at least $100 billion for a two-year involvement."
We're looking at $3.5-4 TRILLION for that war & Afghanistan both started and left unfinished.
