Looks like Obama was correct about Benghazi

[


Do you want us to stop buying their oil?

Think that'll make em happy?

I get a kick out of liberals who hate fossil fuels and spend most of their free time proclaiming it while typing on their PC which needs electricity to operate. Electricity that needs coal or fuel oil plants to generate energy.

I live in Illinois, most of our power comes from Nuclear.

But here's the gag. We are addicted to oil. 3% of the world population, 25% of its energy consumption. We do have an addiction, and terrorism is a side effect.
 
What "coverup"?

Benghazi was a secret?

Romney was giving play by play outrage as the attack was happening.

First time that a Presidential candidate has done that.

In any case..the big story you folks gleaned from this was that the CIA sent the state department on the morning shows to blame this on a video which was responsible for protests ALL OVER THE MIDDLE EAST.

3 DAYS LATER, the administration came out and said that MAY NOT BE THE CASE.

So ALL THIS outrage is over 3 days and a video.

Only serious dumbasses ever believed that idiotic tale to begin with or that the "why" actually matters.

What idiotic tale?

That the people of the middle east are pissed?

That they don't like the fact their countries are run by puppets of the west?

That they don't like the fact that their religion is constantly shitted on?

That they don't like the fact that their natural resources are considered "national interests" of foreign countries?

Not really sure which "idiotic tale" you are going with..

That would be the idiotic tale that this was not a planned attack by terrorists. People are outraged by Obama's and the State dept.'s negligence before, during, and after the attack. Also by the idea people bring mortars and other heavy weapons to a peaceful demonstration. Terrorist can be expected to act like terrorists. Obama and the State Dept. are supposed to be on our side.
 
* * * *

I live in Illinois, most of our power comes from Nuclear.

But here's the gag. We are addicted to oil. 3% of the world population, 25% of its energy consumption. We do have an addiction, and terrorism is a side effect.

^ silly faux analysis.

We are dependent on oil. That does not mean we have to be dependent on Arabian oil. Dependency isn't always a bad thing: I am pretty dependent upon oxygen, too.

In any event, it is plainly not the case that terrorism (of the al qaeda variety) is a side effect of our alleged "addiction" to oil.

That kind of terrorism is a side effect of a variety of the filthy disease we call Islam.
 
Last edited:
* * * *

I live in Illinois, most of our power comes from Nuclear.

But here's the gag. We are addicted to oil. 3% of the world population, 25% of its energy consumption. We do have an addiction, and terrorism is a side effect.

^ silly faux analysis.

We are dependent on oil. That does not mean we have to be dependent on Arabian oil. Dependency isn't always a bad thing: I am pretty dependent upon oxygen, too.

In any event, it is plainly not the case that terrorism (of the al qaeda variety) is a side effect of our alleged "addiction" to oil.

That kind of terrorism is a side effect of a variety of the filthy disease we call Islam.

Really? How much trouble did we have with Islam in 1880? In 1920?

And one more time, the reason why we have Al Qaeda was because back in the 1980
s, your boy Reagan decided to call these guys "Freedom Fighters" and arm them with weapons because the Ruskies were teaching girls how to read in Afghanistan.
 
* * * *

I live in Illinois, most of our power comes from Nuclear.

But here's the gag. We are addicted to oil. 3% of the world population, 25% of its energy consumption. We do have an addiction, and terrorism is a side effect.

^ silly faux analysis.

We are dependent on oil. That does not mean we have to be dependent on Arabian oil. Dependency isn't always a bad thing: I am pretty dependent upon oxygen, too.

In any event, it is plainly not the case that terrorism (of the al qaeda variety) is a side effect of our alleged "addiction" to oil.

That kind of terrorism is a side effect of a variety of the filthy disease we call Islam.

Really? How much trouble did we have with Islam in 1880? In 1920?

And one more time, the reason why we have Al Qaeda was because back in the 1980
s, your boy Reagan decided to call these guys "Freedom Fighters" and arm them with weapons because the Ruskies were teaching girls how to read in Afghanistan.

The First Barbary War (1801–1805), also known as the Tripolitan War or the Barbary Coast War, was the first of two wars fought between the United States and the Northwest African Berber Muslim states known collectively as the Barbary States. These were Tripoli and Algiers, which were quasi-independent entities nominally belonging to the Ottoman Empire, and the independent Sultanate of Morocco.

First Barbary War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Get an education Joe.
 
* * * *

I live in Illinois, most of our power comes from Nuclear.

But here's the gag. We are addicted to oil. 3% of the world population, 25% of its energy consumption. We do have an addiction, and terrorism is a side effect.

^ silly faux analysis.

We are dependent on oil. That does not mean we have to be dependent on Arabian oil. Dependency isn't always a bad thing: I am pretty dependent upon oxygen, too.

In any event, it is plainly not the case that terrorism (of the al qaeda variety) is a side effect of our alleged "addiction" to oil.

That kind of terrorism is a side effect of a variety of the filthy disease we call Islam.

Really? How much trouble did we have with Islam in 1880? In 1920?

And one more time, the reason why we have Al Qaeda was because back in the 1980
s, your boy Reagan decided to call these guys "Freedom Fighters" and arm them with weapons because the Ruskies were teaching girls how to read in Afghanistan.

Without those Arms the Afghani's could never have done what they did...oh the horror Ronnie help an oppressed people defeat an invading army.

What a moron.
 
* * * *

I live in Illinois, most of our power comes from Nuclear.

But here's the gag. We are addicted to oil. 3% of the world population, 25% of its energy consumption. We do have an addiction, and terrorism is a side effect.

^ silly faux analysis.

We are dependent on oil. That does not mean we have to be dependent on Arabian oil. Dependency isn't always a bad thing: I am pretty dependent upon oxygen, too.

In any event, it is plainly not the case that terrorism (of the al qaeda variety) is a side effect of our alleged "addiction" to oil.

That kind of terrorism is a side effect of a variety of the filthy disease we call Islam.

Really? How much trouble did we have with Islam in 1880? In 1920?

And one more time, the reason why we have Al Qaeda was because back in the 1980
s, your boy Reagan decided to call these guys "Freedom Fighters" and arm them with weapons because the Ruskies were teaching girls how to read in Afghanistan.
When they weren't raping or killing them.
 
Obama's a lying piece of shit

Top Defense officials briefed Obama on ‘attack,’ not video or protest

minutes after the American consulate in Benghazi came under assault on Sept. 11, 2012, the nation's top civilian and uniformed defense officials -- headed for a previously scheduled Oval Office session with President Obama -- were informed that the event was a "terrorist attack," declassified documents show. The new evidence raises the question of why the top military men, one of whom was a member of the president's Cabinet, allowed him and other senior Obama administration officials to press a false narrative of the Benghazi attacks for two weeks afterward.

Gen. Carter Ham, who at the time was head of AFRICOM, the Defense Department combatant command with jurisdiction over Libya, told the House in classified testimony last year that it was him who broke the news about the unfolding situation in Benghazi to then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The tense briefing -- in which it was already known that U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens had been targeted and had gone missing -- occurred just before the two senior officials departed the Pentagon for their session with the commander in chief.

According to declassified testimony obtained by Fox News, Ham -- who was working out of his Pentagon office on the afternoon of Sept. 11 -- said he learned about the assault on the consulate compound within 15 minutes of its commencement, at 9:42 p.m. Libya time, through a call he received from the AFRICOM Command Center.

The transcript reads as follows:

WENSTRUP: "As a military person, I am concerned that someone in the military would be advising that this was a demonstration. I would hope that our military leadership would be advising that this was a terrorist attack."

HAM: "Again, sir, I think, you know, there was some preliminary discussion about, you know, maybe there was a demonstration. But I think at the command, I personally and I think the command very quickly got to the point that this was not a demonstration, this was a terrorist attack."

WENSTRUP: "And you would have advised as such if asked. Would that be correct?"

HAM: "Well, and with General Dempsey and Secretary Panetta, that is the nature of the conversation we had, yes, sir."


Ham's declassified testimony further underscores that Obama's earliest briefing on Benghazi was solely to the effect that the incident was a terrorist attack, and raises once again the question of how the narrative about the offensive video, and a demonstration that never occurred, took root within the White House as the explanation for Benghazi.

The Benghazi Transcripts: Top Defense officials briefed Obama on ?attack,? not video or protest | Fox News
 
Last edited:
Obama's a lying piece of shit

Top Defense officials briefed Obama on ‘attack,’ not video or protest

minutes after the American consulate in Benghazi came under assault on Sept. 11, 2012, the nation's top civilian and uniformed defense officials -- headed for a previously scheduled Oval Office session with President Obama -- were informed that the event was a "terrorist attack," declassified documents show. The new evidence raises the question of why the top military men, one of whom was a member of the president's Cabinet, allowed him and other senior Obama administration officials to press a false narrative of the Benghazi attacks for two weeks afterward.

Gen. Carter Ham, who at the time was head of AFRICOM, the Defense Department combatant command with jurisdiction over Libya, told the House in classified testimony last year that it was him who broke the news about the unfolding situation in Benghazi to then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The tense briefing -- in which it was already known that U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens had been targeted and had gone missing -- occurred just before the two senior officials departed the Pentagon for their session with the commander in chief.

According to declassified testimony obtained by Fox News, Ham -- who was working out of his Pentagon office on the afternoon of Sept. 11 -- said he learned about the assault on the consulate compound within 15 minutes of its commencement, at 9:42 p.m. Libya time, through a call he received from the AFRICOM Command Center.

The transcript reads as follows:

WENSTRUP: "As a military person, I am concerned that someone in the military would be advising that this was a demonstration. I would hope that our military leadership would be advising that this was a terrorist attack."

HAM: "Again, sir, I think, you know, there was some preliminary discussion about, you know, maybe there was a demonstration. But I think at the command, I personally and I think the command very quickly got to the point that this was not a demonstration, this was a terrorist attack."

WENSTRUP: "And you would have advised as such if asked. Would that be correct?"

HAM: "Well, and with General Dempsey and Secretary Panetta, that is the nature of the conversation we had, yes, sir."


Ham's declassified testimony further underscores that Obama's earliest briefing on Benghazi was solely to the effect that the incident was a terrorist attack, and raises once again the question of how the narrative about the offensive video, and a demonstration that never occurred, took root within the White House as the explanation for Benghazi.

The Benghazi Transcripts: Top Defense officials briefed Obama on ?attack,? not video or protest | Fox News

you can figure whatever he says

or the admin puts out is a lie or omission

or or has some fine print to it
 
^ silly faux analysis.

We are dependent on oil. That does not mean we have to be dependent on Arabian oil. Dependency isn't always a bad thing: I am pretty dependent upon oxygen, too.

In any event, it is plainly not the case that terrorism (of the al qaeda variety) is a side effect of our alleged "addiction" to oil.

That kind of terrorism is a side effect of a variety of the filthy disease we call Islam.

Really? How much trouble did we have with Islam in 1880? In 1920?

And one more time, the reason why we have Al Qaeda was because back in the 1980
s, your boy Reagan decided to call these guys "Freedom Fighters" and arm them with weapons because the Ruskies were teaching girls how to read in Afghanistan.

The First Barbary War (1801–1805), also known as the Tripolitan War or the Barbary Coast War, was the first of two wars fought between the United States and the Northwest African Berber Muslim states known collectively as the Barbary States. These were Tripoli and Algiers, which were quasi-independent entities nominally belonging to the Ottoman Empire, and the independent Sultanate of Morocco.

First Barbary War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Get an education Joe.

Hey, Bugwit, I didn't ask about 1801. Which wasn't about "Islam" or Religion, it was about piracy.

Again- What was our beef with "Islam" in 1880? or in 1920?

We didn't have one.

We started having a beef with them when we decided that their oil was our oil.
 
Really? How much trouble did we have with Islam in 1880? In 1920?

And one more time, the reason why we have Al Qaeda was because back in the 1980
s, your boy Reagan decided to call these guys "Freedom Fighters" and arm them with weapons because the Ruskies were teaching girls how to read in Afghanistan.

The First Barbary War (1801–1805), also known as the Tripolitan War or the Barbary Coast War, was the first of two wars fought between the United States and the Northwest African Berber Muslim states known collectively as the Barbary States. These were Tripoli and Algiers, which were quasi-independent entities nominally belonging to the Ottoman Empire, and the independent Sultanate of Morocco.

First Barbary War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Get an education Joe.

Hey, Bugwit, I didn't ask about 1801. Which wasn't about "Islam" or Religion, it was about piracy.

Again- What was our beef with "Islam" in 1880? or in 1920?

We didn't have one.

We started having a beef with them when we decided that their oil was our oil.

Joe the election is over don't you think it's time to stop campaigning for obama, after all you are a republican, or at least you say you are.
 
Again, wasn't talking about Obama.

I asked a valid point, did we make our own mess with Bin Laden by arming him?

Tell you what, the GOP stops acting batshit crazy, I'll stop sticking up for Obama.

Sure joe, you do post in other threads.

Then talk to me about it in those threads.

The Grown-ups are talking here.
 
Again, wasn't talking about Obama.

I asked a valid point, did we make our own mess with Bin Laden by arming him?

Tell you what, the GOP stops acting batshit crazy, I'll stop sticking up for Obama.

Sure joe, you do post in other threads.

Then talk to me about it in those threads.

The Grown-ups are talking here.

I'm not chasing the threads down, I'll address it here.
So when are you going to stop campaigning for obama?
 
Again, wasn't talking about Obama.

I asked a valid point, did we make our own mess with Bin Laden by arming him?

Tell you what, the GOP stops acting batshit crazy, I'll stop sticking up for Obama.

Did we arm Bin Laden with 767s?

I don't think a civilian passenger jet is in the military inventory.

No, but we did provide his organization with arms, support, and money, which gave it the prestige to recruit lots of young kids to fly 767's.

Now, imagine, if you would an alternative universe where we didn't arm crazy people, where the Soviets turned Afghanistan into a Roach Motel for Jihadists....

Can't see that as a bad thing, really.
 

Forum List

Back
Top