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 ... 64, 65, 66 ... 75, 76, 77  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
stevenbard



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 3961

PostPosted: Wed Apr 30, 2014 12:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A lot of hate going on here Mac. Don't you at least think that Hillary and Obama had a hand in the deception? IMO, if you look at the Nixon WH and this one, today's is far more corrupt. The American people are beginning to understand this if you trust the polls.

In fact it seems that every White House was corrupt since Eisenhower except Ford. (Reagan was pretty clean ) Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5698

PostPosted: Wed Apr 30, 2014 2:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

"Reagan was pretty clean"

How easily you forget reality. I guess the fact that President Reagan couldn't remember anything when questioned about the Iran Contra fiasco was good enough, right? Nothing going on here, just move on.

Reagan should have been fried for his blatant dishonesty. Justice wasn't served, but that's OK with you, right? The truth be damned.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2587

PostPosted: Wed Apr 30, 2014 4:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevenbard wrote:
A lot of hate going on here Mac. Don't you at least think that Hillary and Obama had a hand in the deception? IMO, if you look at the Nixon WH and this one, today's is far more corrupt. The American people are beginning to understand this if you trust the polls.

In fact it seems that every White House was corrupt since Eisenhower except Ford. (Reagan was pretty clean ) Cool

Reagan was pretty clean?

Which Ronald Reagan are you thinking of? The Reagan who secretly sold arms to Iran, a direct violation of law, in order to secretly give money to the Contras? That Reagan?

The Reagan who claimed that Medicare would end liberty and freedom for all? That Reagan?

What planet are you from?

Oh, yeah, and Mr. NitWit....

Let me say this about that....

"Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi."

There, it's done; now you don't "half to."
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
youwindsurf



Joined: 18 Aug 2012
Posts: 499
Location: North Shore High School

PostPosted: Wed Apr 30, 2014 7:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevenbard wrote:
A lot of hate going on here Mac. Don't you at least think that Hillary and Obama had a hand in the deception? IMO, if you look at the Nixon WH and this one, today's is far more corrupt. The American people are beginning to understand this if you trust the polls.

In fact it seems that every White House was corrupt since Eisenhower except Ford. (Reagan was pretty clean ) Cool


Reagan pretty clean? Talk about not knowing your history! Mr. Bard, tear down that ignorance.

Deception? How 'bout Bush and Saddam's alleged WMD's? How many people died over that deception?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 13863

PostPosted: Wed Apr 30, 2014 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevenbard wrote:
Don't you at least think that Hillary and Obama had a hand in the deception?

Four hands, plus four feet and two mouths. Who but Obama gives his personal communications staff its marching orders to protect him at any cost, Jay Carney was on the smoking gun email distribution list, Panetta initially said he told the Pres it was a coordinated attack and nothing but, 3500 emails demanded by the Congress over a year ago were kept secret until just this past month, and the man responsible for the coverup was promoted. Besides, Obama has since lied ... video tapes to the contrary be damned ... several times that he said in the ensuing Rose Garden speech that it was terrorism. It was shown long ago that Hillary's first-line staff was all over the truth about the attacks, and that they had briefed and.or emailed her about it. She asks, "What difference does it make at this point?" and expects to be taken seriously as a candidate for dogcatcher?

We don't just think they had a hand in it; anyone with an impartial bone in his body knows they did. Nixon took home a 75-cent office pen by comparison.


Last edited by isobars on Thu May 01, 2014 10:50 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5001

PostPosted: Wed Apr 30, 2014 10:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bard--you can't recognize humor, can you:

Quote:
A lot of hate going on here Mac.


You cannot see the irony and humor in righties--including you--that try to make what they think is persuasive arguments with fundamental logic and spelling errors?

The entire thread where you repeated drudge report type nonsense in defense of Bundy and in support of armed militias fighting the Federal government is just a scream! You are too hapless and silly to hate.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 1566
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Wed Apr 30, 2014 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac wrote:
They don't half to--Nit wit--I think you meant "have". But then, you don't have much. Sense, or clues.

I LOVE you man!
I'm going to nominate you for the interwebs teacher of the year!
Your brilliance is overwhelming!

_________________
I don't drink the 'cool' aid, I drink tequila, it's more honest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3236

PostPosted: Wed Apr 30, 2014 12:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Each day you guys eagerly read false or misleading statements in your media.
You do not care at all about that.
You repeat these misleading statements here and elsewhere with no conscience. When the facts emerge you have no sense at all that you were lying.
Obama doesn't explain the whole thing in razor sharp detail with perfect analysis and he is a liar.
Special standard for Obama in this as in all things.
This is why the voice of conservatives grows weaker each day with thinking fair people. Conservatives have met the enemy who will destroy us.
It is ourselves and our hypocrisy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 13863

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2014 10:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Watching the faces, hearing voices tremble or emphasize, seeing the congressmen's behavior, and so much more gained by watching the Benghazi hearings is invaluable to understanding why this coverup of the coverup is vital, REAL news. It has become crystal and undeniably clear that the White House Communications Staff, which directly serves the Oval Office, lied and still lies about the cause and evolution of the Benghazi attack specifically in order to protect the President to influence the outcome of the election. That violated and violates the Hatch Act, according to many legal opinions. The problem is that legal action depends on the integrity of the A.G. of the U.S., and it's obvious our current A.G. has none.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2587

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2014 11:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mr. Fick-shun wrote:
Watching the faces, hearing voices tremble or emphasize, seeing the congressmen's behavior, and so much more gained by watching the Benghazi hearings is invaluable to understanding why this coverup of the coverup is vital, REAL news. It has become crystal and undeniably clear that the White House Communications Staff, which directly serves the Oval Office, lied and still lies about the cause and evolution of the Benghazi attack specifically in order to protect the President to influence the outcome of the election. That violated and violates the Hatch Act, according to many legal opinions. The problem is that legal action depends on the integrity of the A.G. of the U.S., and it's obvious our current A.G. has none.


Suck on this, Mikey:

13 Benghazis That Occurred on Bush's Watch Without a Peep from Fox News

The Republican inquisition over the attacks against Americans in Benghazi has never really gone away, but it appears as though in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombing and the House Oversight Committee's Benghazi hearings this week there are renewed psycho-histrionics over Benghazi.

Lindsey Graham and Fox News Channel in particular are each crapping their cages over new allegations from an alleged whistleblower, while they continue to deal in previously debunked falsehoods about the sequence of events during and following the attacks. Fox News is predictably helming the biggest raft of hooey on the situation -- turning its attention to Hillary Clinton in an abundantly obvious early move to stymie her presidential run before it even begins.

So I thought I'd revisit some territory I covered back in October as a bit of a refresher -- especially since it appears as if no one, including and especially the traditional press, intends to ask any of these obnoxious, opportunistic liars about why they're so obsessed by this one attack yet they entirely ignored the dozen-plus consulate/embassy attacks that occurred when George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were allegedly "keeping us safe."

The Benghazi attacks (the consulate and the CIA compound) are absolutely not unprecedented even though they're being treated that way by Republicans who are deliberately ignoring anything that happened prior to Inauguration Day, January 20, 2009.

January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.

June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al Qaeda attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.

October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of "Bali Bombings." No fatalities.

February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.

May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic compound, killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.

July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.

December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.

March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name "David Foy." This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what's considered American soil.)

September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting "Allahu akbar" storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.

January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.

March 18, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.

July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.

September 17, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had been married for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.

A few observations about this timeline. My initial list was quoted from an article on the Daily Kos which actually contained several errors and only 11 attacks (the above timeline contains all 13 attacks). Also, my list above doesn't include the numerous and fatal attacks on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad during the Iraq war -- a war that was vocally supported by Lindsey Graham, John McCain and Fox News Channel.

Speaking of Graham, I ran a search on each attack along with the name "Lindsey Graham" in the hopes of discovering that Graham had perhaps commented about the attacks or raised some questions about why the administration didn't prevent the attacks or respond accordingly to prevent additional embassy attacks. No results. Of course. Now, this could mean the search wasn't exhaustive enough. But one thing's for sure: neither Graham nor any of his cohorts launched a crusade against the Bush administration and the State Department in any of those cases -- no one did, including the congressional Democrats, by the way.

This leads us to the ultimate point here. Not only have numerous sources previously debunked the Benghazi information being peddled by the Republicans and Fox News (for example, contrary to what the Republicans are saying, yes, reinforcements did in fact arrive before the attack on the CIA compound), but none of these people raised a single word of protest when, for example, American embassies in Yemen and Pakistan were attacked numerous times. Why didn't the Bush administration do something to secure the compounds after the first attacks? Why didn't he provide additional security?

Where was your inquest after the Karachi attacks, Mr. Graham? Where were you after the Sana'a attacks, Mr. Hannity? What about all of the embassy attacks in Iraq that I didn't even list here, Mr. McCain? Do you realize how many people died in attacks on U.S. embassies and consulates when Bush was supposedly keeping us safe, Mr. Ailes? Just once I'd like to hear David Gregory or George Stephanopoulos or Wolf Blitzer ask a Republican member of Congress about the above timeline and why they said nothing at the time of each attack. Just once.

Nearly every accusation being issued about Benghazi could've been raised about the Bush-era attacks, and yet these self-proclaimed truth-seekers refused to, in their words, undermine the commander-in-chief while troops were in harm's way (a line they repeated over and over again during those years).

So we're only left to conclude the obvious. The investigations and accusations and conspiracy theories are entirely motivated by politics and a strategy to escalate this to an impeachment trial. In doing so, the Republicans have the opportunity not only to crush the president's second term, but also to sabotage the potential for a Hillary Clinton presidency.

Even if they never arrive at that goal, they have in their possession a cudgel formed of horseshit -- a means of flogging the current administration with the singularly effective Republican marketing/noise machine, including the conservative entertainment complex. Very seldom does this machine fail to revise history and distort the truth. Ultimately, they don't even need a full-blown impeachment proceeding when they have a population of way too many truthers and automatons who take all of these lies at face value -- not to mention dubiously sourced chunks of "truth" proffered by radio and cable news conspiracy theorists who, if nothing else, are masters at telling angry conservatives precisely what they want to hear: that the probably-Muslim president is weak on terrorism. And so they'll keep repeating "Benghazi-Gate, Benghazi-Gate, Benghazi-Gate!" without any regard for history or reality. Like always.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/13-benghazis-that-occurre_b_3246847.html


.
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 ... 64, 65, 66 ... 75, 76, 77  Next
Page 65 of 77

 
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