myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums 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 ... 40, 41, 42 ... 80, 81, 82  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3538

PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 3:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The media is about money and profit like any business.
They covered Clinton to death and will the same with Benghazi if we are willing to watch it. When we stop watching they go back to lost dog stories.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 3753
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 3:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

yeah ....right
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14624

PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LHDR wrote:
1. "Wednesday's hearing did not prove anything like an administration cover-up or other hysterical allegations of crimes equal to Watergate that some Republicans, such as Representative Steve King, Senator Lindsey Graham, as well as iWindsurfer Isobars, have alleged."

2. How is falsely blaming a youtube video instead of a well-planned terrorist attack more than stupidity?

1. If not that, the left wing media's confessions about the 12 revisions of the CIA summary DOES reveal coverup proof even to Bill Maher and Michael Moore.

2. Your ignorance of the facts is showing. While the attack was beginning, during its escalation, and for every moment from then until now, the ONLY source of the lie that a demonstration was even under way, let alone connected with the attack, was the administration. If you'd listen to the first-hand testimony, you'd know that the video was barely even known there, that there was no demonstration, and that the ambassador's last known words to the administration were shouted appeals for military help because "The walls have been breached and we're under attack". No videos, no guys carrying placards, no shoes being thrown, not even a hint about demonstrations ... just heavy automatic weapons, pre-sighted mortar fire, and much more. The CIA report was all about terrorists and Al Qaeda; the WH and State totally rewrote it and invented the "video" and "demonstration" lies. Anyone who doesn't know that by now does not care enough about the facts to deserve the right to vote.

You're goddamned right this time, Mo; I'm ANGRY. The GD left wing press is finally revealing a few truths about this administration, but maybe too late to save the Republic from the sickening direction it's heading. I f---ing HATE dishonesty!


Last edited by isobars on Fri May 10, 2013 4:47 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2766

PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 3:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mikey wrote:

2. You're ignorance of the facts is showing.

Your ignorance...
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5575

PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So now we know the dimensions of the Obama conspiracy? His State Department staff edited the talking points to remove references to Al Queda? That's it?

Now let me remember. The "decider" instructed his national security people to not let the Al Queda expert brief him any more. Of course Al Queda had already tried to bring down the Twin Towers with a truck bomb, and had bombed the US Cole. Simply the work of an overworked President, trying to sort out priorities, eh? After all, Bin Laden hadn't demonstrated any ability to actually launch a successful attack. The Department of State and Obama being perhaps naïve in assuming that we had some good will in Libya for helping overthrow Ghaddafi? Clearly the work of someone trying to destroy this great country.

I couldn't invent stuff this silly if I wrote for Colbert.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2766

PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mikey "I f---ing HATE dishonesty!" Fick-shun wrote:

Last edited by isobars on 10 May 2013 21:47; edited 1 time in total

I LOVE it! Mikey hates dishonesty, yet he's the biggest dissembler here.

You never read my posts, Mr. Fiction?

Sure thing, Ace..........

.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14624

PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 8:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nw30 wrote:
will Hillary fall on the sword for BHO?

Jay Carney, speaking directly for the President, thrust that sword through Hillary's torso today when he repeated endlessly again to the White House press corps that the White House changed only one word in the CIA talking points. That leaves only State (it sure as hell wasn't HUD or Education that deleted the other 60% of the document), so Carney's Obamafinger was pointing straight at 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Neither Clinton is likely to take that lying down. If she thrusts back with that sword by testifying openly (rather than asking who cares what happened to the Benghazi heroes), Obama is toast. The question then becomes whether Obama will sacrifice his legacy to put her in the White House in 2017 (God forbid).

I suspect that even after today's presser, the most cement-headed lefties still won't understand the implications of this coverup and its newly revealed lies. Here's a tip to them: The I in CIA stands for Intelligence, in this case facts and educated opinions developed by experts. The Administration deleted 2/3 of that intelligence, invented a demonstration, blamed the fabricated demonstration on a video, arrested the video's author on unrelated petty charges, lied for months about all of that and MUCH more, and now blames it all on Hillary (I guess "Bush did it" didn't fool anyone).

It could be fun when the unclassified White House-to-CIA emails Carney admitted to today but expressly refused to release get exposed. Maybe then we'll begin to understand whether the balance of culpability falls on the White House or the State Dept.

Meanwhile, it was funny watching the parade of left wing reporters today, FINALLY realizing they have been and still are being absolutely hoodwinked by this administration, pounding Carney in vain for the truth after ABC and other networks exposed the very thoroughly doctored CIA talking points. One left wing news agency after another grilled him, many of them trying one tough question after another about the politically motivated coverup, a huge change from their usual softball questions.

Let's hope this whole deception hits the fan hard enough to wake the press up to the extent of their contribution to the nation's slide into the mob-ruled Democracy our nation's founders so powerfully warned us against.

I wonder how many of you news-deprived lefties even know that Obama, Biden, Rice, Panetta, and more hugged the Benghazi SEAL's Mom beside his casket, looked her in the eye, promised to tell her the entire story very soon, and TOLD HER THE ATTACK WAS CAUSED BY A VIDEO, known by every every sentient person in the free world by then to be a lie. Not one of them has contacted her in any way since that day, despite her endless demands for answers.

Scum. Just scum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LHDR



Joined: 22 Jun 2007
Posts: 108

PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 12:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

isobars wrote:
... I f---ing HATE dishonesty!
If the administration completely invented the youtube video story for no good reason, they were dishonest. Since the dishonesty in this particular case did not harm or help anyone, it may be the kind of dishonesty that we have to live with in politics. It would be very different if, for example, the administration had falsely claimed that people with weapons of mass destruction were behind the attack and that, therefore, we had to go to war with Libya, and if in the ensuing war tens of thousands of people, including US soldiers and innocent civilians, had died. Now that would be the kind of dishonesty and lying that is unacceptable, and, thankfully, that is not going to happen with our current President.

isobars wrote:
... If Hillary Clinton thrusts back with that sword by testifying openly (rather than asking who cares what happened to the Benghazi heroes)...
So Hillary Clinton asked who cares what happened to the Benghazi heroes? Or is it referring to this statement “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided to go kill Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.” If it were the latter, then Isobars' statement would just be the latest example of his all too common despicable distortions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stevenbard



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 4344

PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 12:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

LHDR, Hillary knew in real time that this was a terrorist attack. So did Obama, the CIA, and the Military. The crime here was cowardice. It wasn't your typical mealy mouth politician covering his/her ass.

They should have sent a rescue mission. It would have possibly saved at least 2 brave Americans, and sent a message to the Islamists. To be honest, I wish we'd just shut down our embassys and missions in the unstable countries, and let them rot, instead of putting boots on the ground. But in this case, they were on American soil.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LHDR



Joined: 22 Jun 2007
Posts: 108

PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevenbard wrote:
They should have sent a rescue mission. It would have possibly saved at least 2 brave Americans, and sent a message to the Islamists. ...
As far as I can tell, the Mullen report is very critical of failures leading up to the attack, but does not suggest that obvious military decisions that might have helped during the attack were not taken. In fact one statement reads "The interagency response was timely and appropriate, but there simply was not enough time for armed U.S. military assets to have made a difference." The authors of this report know so much more than anyone here that I have a hard time being convinced otherwise.
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 ... 40, 41, 42 ... 80, 81, 82  Next
Page 41 of 82

 
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