myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Benghazi-gate
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 32, 33, 34 ... 78, 79, 80  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 1712
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 12:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac wrote:
NW--you are still a paranoid and biased guy who ignores the larger context. From page 27, here are all of the attacks on embassies during Republican administrations that didn't raise your ire:

Quote:
What complaints did you make about Ronald Reagan when 241 people died in an attack on our barracks in Beirut? What complaints did you make when a soldier died in the April 5, 1986 bombing of a Berlin disco? http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0406c.asp

And then there is shrub. According to this site, there were 12 attacks on embassies during his tenure: http://www.usmessageboard.com/middle-east-general/246760-twelve-u-s-embassy-attacks-during-george-w-bush-administration.html. I didn't know that--but I did know that he ignored bin Laden despite the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993--he wasn't President. But he was president when the Cole was bombed in 2000. Up until that point, I think that we can consider both Reagan and Bush's failures underestimation rather than negligence. But after that? Negligence to close the door to your national security staff working on finding bin Laden. I had a friend who survived both WTC bombings. Bush was negligent. It might not have mattered, given the fact that the FBI and other law enforcement agencies weren't working together. That was incompetence. We didn't hear from you right wing chicken hawks when Bush said don't bother me any more about this guy that blew up a couple embassies, the WTC once, and the US Cole.


You Faux fans keeping hoping for some traction.


Oh, that's right, because it has happened in the past, it's okay for it to continue, and not learn from mistakes.
Excuse me for forgetting that important fact of yours.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5223

PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You scoffed when KC said that working in an embassy in a dangerous place is dangerous. Now you scoff at the evidence that demonstrates it was the case in earlier administrations. The problem is not learning from our mistakes--including quite possibly the presence of a CIA group that led to blowback--but the application of different standards of competence to different Presidents. It is called bias, and you are Exhibit A.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 1477

PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mac, you are right, the Benghazi incident isn't much different than several other previous acts of aggression against the US abroad & at home, EXCEPT that I don't recall any effort by the administration/state department to deflect/cover up how the incident came to be. Plus the obvious dodge by Hillary to keep from testifying. That's what is different this time, and many of us wonder why.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5820

PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

techno900, do you doubt that Secretary of State Clinton fainted and suffered a concussion, and as a result, she wasn't able to testify as originally scheduled? From what I understand, she hasn't refused to testify at a later date.

What's with the righteous impatience that makes folks like you think the worst and ultimately leads you to question the integrity and honor of our leaders.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 1477

PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am a skeptic when it comes to politicians. I think there is more here than meets the eye and every effort will be made to dodge accountability.

Since it appears that Hillary will be a presidential candidate next time, don't you think that she would make every effort to keep her image as clean as possible. If testifying is a risk for her, she will make every effort to avoid the issue. If there is nothing for her to hide, then I think she would volunteer to testify to set the "record straight". I personally don't think that will ever happen, but we shall see.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3371

PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 3:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have followed Benghazi and still don't know of any other crime except failing to provide reporters with inside info during an election cycle about an attack on a CIA facility in an Embassy.
Everything else seems to me to be taking a regrettablely frequent event and turning it onto a circus for political reasons.
When Bush was in office such events were of little import .Now that Blame Obama is the main thing that passes for news on the right, we have a major problem with a long list of invented nonsense.
I want all our leaders to faint, walk away, and stop spending our money on this, and get back to work.
This is the thing we have not learned from all these tragic deaths overseas.
They are our people and not political footballs.
Conservatives need a party who would be working on the fiscal cliff,unemployment, and not focusing on getting even.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5820

PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"I am a skeptic when it comes to politicians."


Based on what you said, do you question integrity of a stupid rooster like Rep. Darryl Issa and his like? Frankly, I resent the specious dog and pony shows he often puts on, particularly the one pertaining to the Benghazi incident. If I was Clinton, I'd blow the jerk off.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5223

PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Techno--clearly there was a CIA operation of some sort--which is secret. Of necessity, the administration response is going to be guarded until agents are out of harms way. Whether the Department of State staff knew about it (they usually do), and whether or not it had something to do with the attack are interesting questions that we don't have the necessary security clearance to learn the answers to. But the three first lines of attack by the Re-thugs under Issa's direction/leaks were all proved wrong. Obama called it a terrorist attack the next day. It turns out they had the number of guards that the security people had asked for--and it wasn't enough. And there is no evidence that Obama watched it in real time and did nothing, or that armed forces from other countries could have arrived in time. At what point, when selectively leaked material that turns out to be false, do we question the motives of the leakers?

Chris Stevens was the son of one of my former legal advisors, Jan Stevens--who asked that his son's death not be publicized. We should definitely learn from this incident--whether there are mistakes or not--and there is a full investigative report--parts of which are classified--prepared by a team with credibility. Partisan Republicans continue to selectively leak bits and pieces, out of context, to attack Obama. And chumps like NW apply a different standard to the Obama administration than they did to the Bush administration. Motives and integrity both matter.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 1477

PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac said:
Quote:
Obama called it a terrorist attack the next day.


In Obama's 5.5 minute speech on 9/12, at about 4:20 through the speech, he said "no act of terror will ever shake the resolve of this nation". That's his only reference to terror and he could be implying that the 9/11 attack was "a terrorist attack", but that's not what he said. Also in the printed transcript, there is no mention of terror, but it's an abbreviated statement.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2012/09/12/president-obama-speaks-attack-benghazi

Also no mention of the video or any reference to a cause for the attack. At best, it's a weak argument that he said it was a terrorist attack, when the implication may have been that any attack on a US Embassy could be considered an act of terror. If his intention was to call it a terrorist attack, it seems to me that he would have played up that point with a little more gusto and included it in the printed statement.

No really strong argument for either side on this issue. Just to get the facts straight.

And if he really believed it was a terrorist attack as the CIA confirmed, then why all the video hype? It just makes no sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5223

PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Techno--and? Is there often some fog about chaotic and violent events? Wasn't the administration story, in its essence, "we'll find the folks that did this," and weren't they also dealing with a blown cover on a CIA operation? For the life of me, I can't see how these tiny semantic differences amount to a hill of beans. Most people are less than precise in much of their speech at least some of the time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 32, 33, 34 ... 78, 79, 80  Next
Page 33 of 80

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group