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 ... 94, 95, 96 ... 121, 122, 123  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10056

PostPosted: Fri Oct 23, 2015 8:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

From your world, I guess that the last thoughtful post was from isobars.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 20205

PostPosted: Fri Oct 23, 2015 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nw30 wrote:
The lame left on display right there in the last several posts.

And they're proud of it!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 16370
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2015 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't let facts interfere with your ranting. Don't let your blood pressure get too high when Hillary is elected because your guys are bozos.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2807

PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 2:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mr. Fick-shun wrote:
nitwit30 wrote:
The lame left on display right there in the last several posts.

And they're proud of it!

On three, now, guys:

One, two, three ------ "Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi."

Keep working at it and maybe you'll get it.

.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jp5



Joined: 19 May 1998
Posts: 3394
Location: OnUr6

PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 6:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pueno wrote:
Mr. Fick-shun wrote:
nitwit30 wrote:
The lame left on display right there in the last several posts.

And they're proud of it!

On three, now, guys:

One, two, three ------ "Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi."

Keep working at it and maybe you'll get it.

.


Hey you know people died there. I don't think it's right to down play it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6482
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 9:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

^^^^ Exactly! it's not just some stupid game.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 16370
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 9:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JB--I don't have any objections to real studies of Benghazi to learn the lessons. We should do that with all projects and efforts, successful or not. I actually don't have that big an objection to the Republicans turning down requests for more security at embassies--here, from 2012:

Quote:
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) acknowledged on Wednesday that House Republicans had consciously voted to reduce the funds allocated to the State Department for embassy security since winning the majority in 2010.

On Wednesday morning, CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien asked the Utah Republican if he had "voted to cut the funding for embassy security."

"Absolutely," Chaffetz said. "Look we have to make priorities and choices in this country. We have…15,000 contractors in Iraq. We have more than 6,000 contractors, a private army there, for President Obama, in Baghdad. And we’re talking about can we get two dozen or so people into Libya to help protect our forces. When you’re in tough economic times, you have to make difficult choices. You have to prioritize things.”


I agree that we need to prioritize things, and with nearly 300 embassies, and embassy security staff always asking for more help, you can't do it all. Nobody knows which one is going to blow up--but they have.

What I have a real problem with is a weasel faced bastard--Trey Gowdy--who voted against more security for embassies going after Hillary and arguing that she must have been personally responsible, and didn't care. She actually had less responsibility than Gowdy. It was someone below Hillary in State who turned down security requests--because she knew it wouldn't get past the Republicans, and maybe even past the Democrats.

Peruse this on Newsweek: http://www.newsweek.com/benghazi-biopsy-comprehensive-guide-one-americas-worst-political-outrages-385853

The Republican shenanigans on this are comparable to Watergate in some ways. Benghazi is one of 20 attacks on embassies over the last two decades, with the worst Beirut, 1983 --63 killed--and Yemen, 2008--18 killed--occurring during Republican presidencies. No Democrats established committees to investigate the sitting Republican Presidents or Secretaries of State. Most grown ups realize that diplomacy in wartime is difficult and dangerous, and have respect for those brave enough to work at it. Not this generation of Republicans. The have seized the powers of government and bent them to naked grasps for more power, without a shred of decency. They are vile, and Issa and Gowdy--who have cut Federal funding for necessary government services as a matter of faith rather than as a sincere effort to balance resources and risks--are contemptible worms.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MalibuGuru



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 8796

PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 1:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

How could one of the highest most responsible officials in government not get classified emails?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2807

PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jpbassman wrote:

Hey you know people died there. I don't think it's right to down play it.

Agreed. And the last seven (or is it eight?) hearings all determined that people died there.

But the hearings and the focus has long been off the facts and long been off the embassy -- "Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi" is the right's call to arms to "Get Clinton."
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pointster



Joined: 22 Jul 2010
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MalibuGuru wrote:
How could one of the highest most responsible officials in government not get classified emails?


The State department has secure, encrypted, communications systems for sensitive voice and text communications. E-mail is not used for information that is classified. As Ms. Clinton testified, she did very little State department business by e-mail.
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 ... 94, 95, 96 ... 121, 122, 123  Next
Page 95 of 123

 
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