Benghazi

2

Replies

  • Further NorthFurther North Senior Member Posts: 1,699 Senior Member
    greenman wrote: »
    Yes son the President had sex and the holier than thou crew went after him but their chief crusader was also caught as an adulterer.

    No, no, no..."Yes son the President had sex and then lied about it under oath. It's none of our business what he does in his private life, but when he lies under oath it's not illegal and we can't put up with that."

    I love how the defenders-of-Bill always think/claim it's about sex. Total nonsense....

    Clinton was not a bad president...he learned fast and did the right things for the most part...but that was over the line. I don't fire people for making mistakes, but I'll fire someone for lying about it in a hearbeat.
    "Just because I criticize your argument doesn't mean that I disagree with your position."
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 23,539 Senior Member
    The only reason why the question was asked was because it was about sex. The question didn't have anything to do with the law suit. He should have said none of your business. But come on this was all about someone wanting to catch Clinton with his pants down, literally.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • Further NorthFurther North Senior Member Posts: 1,699 Senior Member
    He should have said none of your business.

    I agree. And told them to go pound sand...but once he lied....
    "Just because I criticize your argument doesn't mean that I disagree with your position."
  • creekguycreekguy Senior Member Posts: 3,905 Senior Member
    Well, as it turns out, those were not "embassy" staff at Bengazi. And the ambassador was probably that in name only. As I suspected this was a CIA story, and the attack was on a CIA op center. That's perhaps why the news came out in such a strange way. See this:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/02/benghazi-media-news-cia-request_n_2066651.html?ref=topbar
  • GoldenladleGoldenladle Super Moderator Posts: 3,872 Senior Member
    creekguy wrote: »
    Well, as it turns out, those were not "embassy" staff at Bengazi. And the ambassador was probably that in name only. As I suspected this was a CIA story, and the attack was on a CIA op center. That's perhaps why the news came out in such a strange way. See this:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/02/benghazi-media-news-cia-request_n_2066651.html?ref=topbar

    Will this be enough to sooth the hyperventilation from FOX?

    Moved to Montana, gonna be a dental floss tycoon.

  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 9,799 Senior Member
    creekguy wrote: »
    Well, as it turns out, those were not "embassy" staff at Bengazi. And the ambassador was probably that in name only. As I suspected this was a CIA story, and the attack was on a CIA op center. That's perhaps why the news came out in such a strange way. See this:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/02/benghazi-media-news-cia-request_n_2066651.html?ref=topbar

    What makes you think the ambassador was probably that in name only? Without violating security clearances that still bind me I can assure you that his Foreign Service assignments indicate that he did not in fact really work for any Agency that dare not speak its name.
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 23,539 Senior Member
    Yeah I suspect that he was legit. But unfortunately that dumass Issa already revealed enough sensitive information, (why that is not a bigger story is beyond me) that it was already clear that the site was used for gathering intelligence.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 9,799 Senior Member
    Yeah I suspect that he was legit. But unfortunately that dumass Issa already revealed enough sensitive information, (why that is not a bigger story is beyond me) that it was already clear that the site was used for gathering intelligence.

    It's no secret that almost every embassy and consulate has its share of intelligence officers - no reason why Benghazi should be different. The ratio of alphabet agencies to regular ones like State, Defense, Commerce etc. may vary and Benghazi may have been top heavy with intelligence officers and alphabet soldiers, but I do not know if that was the case.
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • creekguycreekguy Senior Member Posts: 3,905 Senior Member
    George K wrote: »
    It's no secret that almost every embassy and consulate has its share of intelligence officers - no reason why Benghazi should be different. The ratio of alphabet agencies to regular ones like State, Defense, Commerce etc. may vary and Benghazi may have been top heavy with intelligence officers and alphabet soldiers, but I do not know if that was the case.

    Well, the obvious point to make is that "news" coming out about the attack was being heavily massaged by the CIA from the beginning. When has that agency voluntarily told the truth about any of their screw ups?
  • EdBEdB Senior Member Posts: 2,926 Senior Member
    creekguy wrote: »
    Well, the obvious point to make is that "news" coming out about the attack was being heavily massaged by the CIA from the beginning. When has that agency voluntarily told the truth about any of their screw ups?

    According to a number of non-MSM news sources, Stevens was running weapons from Libya to the Syrian rebels out of the CIA ops center in Benghazi and the explanation from the Obama administration was an outright lie that should be investigated by congress and people should be prosecuted for treason. But this will all be covered up and ignored as were the crimes of the Bush administration in Iraq. The implementers of our criminal foreign policy are above the law.

    http://blogs.jpost.com/content/benghazi-october-surprise

    We all know how it went, everyone from the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to the Press Secretary Jay Carney, to the Director of National Security James Clapper and President Obama himself all were on the YouTube video bandwagon until the wheels fell off.

    But as time has gone on, new bits and pieces have emerged. The information on the attack makes the deaths of the four Americans that much more senseless. Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, both former Navy SEALs working under the State Department, were killed alongside information management officer Sean Smith and U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens.

    Emails from Benghazi have surfaced showing that Obama, the FBI, CIA, the State Department, the military, as well as other intelligence offices within the government knew within two hours, that the attack on the Benghazi consulate had been carried out by terrorists.
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 9,799 Senior Member
    creekguy wrote: »
    Well, the obvious point to make is that "news" coming out about the attack was being heavily massaged by the CIA from the beginning. When has that agency voluntarily told the truth about any of their screw ups?

    This may or not be correct - I have no idea.

    The more obvious point is that making sense of conflicting early reports from multiple sources while in the midst of an attack or other crisis is not possible.
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 9,799 Senior Member
    Ed,

    Some common sense is called for.

    I do not know what the actual facts of this case are - nor do you - but I do know that if you accept a security clearance or are responsible for the safety of others or if ongoing operations are at risk then denials and obfuscation are not "lying", they are part of your obligation.

    As a Marine you should know this. Your basic training included lessons on not providing information that could endanger your comrades - just name rank and serial number. If you became a POW you were not encouraged to say "I can not tell a lie, here are the map coordinates of my unit, a detailed accounting of our numbers and weaponry and our battle plans".
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 23,539 Senior Member
    EdB wrote: »
    According to a number of non-MSM news sources, Stevens was running weapons from Libya to the Syrian rebels out of the CIA ops center in Benghazi and the explanation from the Obama administration was an outright lie that should be investigated by congress and people should be prosecuted for treason. But this will all be covered up and ignored as were the crimes of the Bush administration in Iraq. The implementers of our criminal foreign policy are above the law.

    First of all this is why you're sources are FOS, there is no way they could get anyone to verify that. Second if that was what they were doing that would make the Obama admin incredibly stupid, because this would be more easily accomplished out of Iraq.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • MicropterusMicropterus Junior Member Posts: 27 Junior Member
    Romney left this subject alone in the third debate. My guess is that between the 2nd and 3rd debates he got a rather eye opening security briefing. Fox News, redstate.com and the rest probably weren't invited.
  • Mr. RightMr. Right Senior Member Posts: 535 Senior Member
    They were playing chess, not checkers. A lot of columnists have specualted that the Obama campaign spent a lot of prep time writing and rehearsing the response to Benghazi when Romney raised it in the third debate. It was likely the strongest prepared response in Obama's quiver for the night. The Romney campaign decided in advance not to raise the subject. I suspect Obama was really upset that he could not deliver his prepared remarks on it.

    My original point on this thread holds firm. If Obama loses, Benghazi will become a non-issue. If he wins, it will become the next Watergate. Nobody died in Watergate.
  • yataheyyatahey Senior Member Posts: 5,605 Senior Member
    In 1983 Reagan sent 500 marines to Lebanon and ordered them not to discharge their weapons and left them sitting ducks for a suicide truck bomb that killed 241 of them. Nothing came of it against Reagan. You conspiracy nuts crack me up.
    "When the goin gets weird, the weird turn pro." Hunter S. Thompson
  • FishTXFishTX Super Moderator Posts: 7,935 Senior Member
    Mr. Right wrote: »
    My original point on this thread holds firm. If Obama loses, Benghazi will become a non-issue. If he wins, it will become the next Watergate. Nobody died in Watergate.
    Why would it be dropped if he loses? If he really screwed up and lied too, wouldn't people seek answers anyway?
    "We have to find someone who can not only fly this plane, but who didn't have fish for dinner."

    Crooow:This music would work better with women in bikinis shaking all over the place. I guess that's true of any music really.
  • creekguycreekguy Senior Member Posts: 3,905 Senior Member
    Mr. Right wrote: »
    A lot of columnists have specualted that the Obama campaign spent a lot of prep time writing and rehearsing the response to Benghazi when Romney raised it in the third debate. It was likely the strongest prepared response in Obama's quiver for the night. The Romney campaign decided in advance not to raise the subject. I suspect Obama was really upset that he could not deliver his prepared remarks on it.

    So, Obama had a devastating response to any Romney attack? Sounds like the issue isn't so strong after all. Guess what, all of the comments by both candidates in those debates came after "a lot of prep time writing and rehearsing". And saying "A lot of columnists have specualted"? Wow, talk about documenting your point (sarcasm alert)! Come on, man, you're not that dumb. Your argument sounds like something right out of Limbaugh's filthy mouth, except here you can't get away with that biased nonsense.
  • greenman wrote: »
    It happened when Bush was in office. We had diplomats killed. Was there screaming here from the left on this board?


    One thing is certain when it happened under 'w's watch The right on this board or anywhere else Faux News included never said a peep, just like they never said a thing as Republicans doubled the national debt, invented debt ceiling limit removals why no one had ever heard of Bin Laden prior to 9-11 and the of course after it was all Clinton's fault (never mind that Reagan and Cheney helped create him in the first place).

    It did however stir them to demand more defense related spending since as we now know $1.4 trillion and $20 million dollar per year defense contractor CEO salaries aren't enough. if its a right wing paranoia supported ideal the solution to that problem is to throw more money at that problem real or otherwise (ie nonexistent voter fraud).

    We also see that when their candidate of choice screams about gubbmint spending all the while having his hand in taxpayers to the tune of millions of dollars via the bailout it is of no consequence because while they pretend to be freedom loving 'Murricans in reality they extend their right arms and put party before country and call it 'freedom'

    Btw ... Apparently the 'stand down' orders as reported by Fox didn't exist so I can hardly wait for their retraction.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 23,539 Senior Member
    creekguy wrote: »
    Come on, man, you're not that dumb.

    Has there been any evidence to support this statement?
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • HextallHextall Senior Member Posts: 9,520 Senior Member
    Mr. Right wrote: »
    If he wins, it will become the next Watergate. Nobody died in Watergate.

    Are you saying you are predicting Obama will be impeached if he wins the election?

    I'm just asking because I'm making a spreadsheet of your predictions.
  • GoldenladleGoldenladle Super Moderator Posts: 3,872 Senior Member
    Hextall wrote: »
    I'm just asking because I'm making a spreadsheet of your predictions.

    How do you add hyperventilation to a spreadsheet?

    Moved to Montana, gonna be a dental floss tycoon.

  • Romney left this subject alone in the third debate. My guess is that between the 2nd and 3rd debates he got a rather eye opening security briefing. Fox News, redstate.com and the rest probably weren't invited.

    bang

    dead on

    folks here are questioning the 'reliability' of the CIA but somehow in light of repeated 'errors' never question the almight Fox News

    btw ... if Romeny is promising to increase defense spending then why on earth would the CIA try to CYA Obama?

    it's be a win-win for them to drop an October surprise on a secret Muslim American hating president
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 9,799 Senior Member
    How do you add hyperventilation to a spreadsheet?

    It's easy if you have a touch screen; just count the amount of sputter behind it.
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • Mr. RightMr. Right Senior Member Posts: 535 Senior Member
    If Obama is re-elected and the Rs retain control of the House, I predict an impeachment based on Benghazi. There's enough information out there on this already for that to happen. I doubt the Senate will find him guilty by the required 2/3 margin, but the whole process will not be good for the country.

    If Obama is not re-elected I do not expect an impeachment, but there will be hearings and some heads will roll.

    As for entering this into a spreadsheet, there is probably a font folks can find to amuse themselves.
  • ouzelproouzelpro Senior Member Posts: 5,361 Senior Member
    A Mr. Rightie compilation of his best posts:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VV9vvekSbr4
  • creekguycreekguy Senior Member Posts: 3,905 Senior Member
    Mr. Right wrote: »
    If Obama is re-elected and the Rs retain control of the House, I predict an impeachment based on Benghazi. There's enough information out there on this already for that to happen. I doubt the Senate will find him guilty by the required 2/3 margin, but the whole process will not be good for the country.

    If Obama is not re-elected I do not expect an impeachment, but there will be hearings and some heads will roll.

    As for entering this into a spreadsheet, there is probably a font folks can find to amuse themselves.

    I predict that this issue will disappear soon after the election, and mr. right will never come back here to admit he was wrong.
  • Mr. RightMr. Right Senior Member Posts: 535 Senior Member
    I predict you are wrong. At least about the second part. I consider it a sacred duty to bring enlightenment here.
  • Your are the Lodge Buddha.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 4,576 Senior Member
    Mr. Right wrote: »
    I consider it a sacred duty to bring enlightenment here.
    That's nice. When you gonna start with your duty?

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Fly Fisherman stories delivered right to your inbox.