Thread: Another US Embassy Under Siege

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

No, what is truly shameful, Bert, is to allow people as cold-hearted and unprincipled as Hillary Clinton into the ranks of government. To wit:
Sen. Ron Johnson asked a question about Benghazi and Hillary Clinton said this: “What difference, at this point, does it make?”
The country is in the very best of hands...

Why not include the entire quote? I actually watched the proceedings unlike you who has his ideas spoonfed to him by Drudge and other craven hatchet-men. The proceedings did underscore for me how lucky we were to have missed the bullet of a McCain presidency - a man has no qualifications for government. How does being a failed jet pilot who finished next to last in his class at Annapolis qualify him for anything other than running his wife's daddy's beer company? Hero my ass.

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

No, what is truly shameful, Bert, is to allow people as cold-hearted and unprincipled as Hillary Clinton into the ranks of government. To wit:
Sen. Ron Johnson asked a question about Benghazi and Hillary Clinton said this: “What difference, at this point, does it make?”
The country is in the very best of hands...

Why not include the entire quote?...

Indeed. Some people clearly aren't interesting in actual facts:

"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 they'd go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?" a clearly exasperated and angry Clinton told Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis. "It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, senator."

The Clinton hearing was a carnival. The highlight was the freshman senator Rand Paul (you remember; the guy who would have repealed the 1963 civil rights legislation? The red-faced rummy named after Ayn Rand?) boasting that if he was president he would have fired Clinton. In his dreams. And McCain, the senile buffoon, confusing Clinton with Susan Rice.

^ Do you think we can expect Rand Paul to be losing an election in the not to distant future then?

I wonder what the republican party would consider an acceptable amount of collateral damage in reference to Americans Live's lost? For the right cause, fairly high it seems as I am sure Exxon, Chevron and Halliburton would agree.

^Never been to Kentucky have you? It's as solid red as they come. The entire state is populated by ignorant red necks. If you show any tendancy toward progressive ideas there you may get lynched.

Now for the real story. So much for drudge.

Fox Analyst Says GOP 'Looked Like Weenies' During Clinton's Benghazi Hearings | ThinkProgress

Is this woman severely brain-damaged or what?

“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 decided to go kill some 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.”

Sounds reasonable to me.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Is this woman severely brain-damaged or what?

How many died in the Beirut embassy bombing which made that coward Reagan panic and run away?

^
That was truly shameful - gotta admit. We should have struck back twice as hard and we might not be in the situation we are today. Although, with Clinton at the helm (Hillary) it would still be a clusterfuck:

Suicide bomber kills guard at US Embassy in Turkey

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) -- In the second deadly assault on a U.S. diplomatic post in five months, a suicide bomber struck the American Embassy in Ankara on Friday, killing a Turkish security guard in what the White House described as a terrorist attack."

News from The Associated Press

US Embassy Bombing in Turkey Was Eighth Embassy Attack During Secretary of State Clinton’s Reign


Hillary: "I've done what was possible to do"

^It's no secret that the US is hated by extremists and that our embassies are prized targets. The Obama administrations policy of engagement has made the US more trusted than the previous military interventionist administration that was reviled by both foe and friend.

Originally Posted by Humbert

The Obama administrations policy of engagement has made the US more trusted than the previous military interventionist administration

Thats a bit optimistic.


drone strikes are only the tip of an iceberg, making up less than 10 percent of at least 20,130 air strikes the U.S. has conducted in other countries since President Obama's inauguration in 2009.
Bomber in Chief: 20,000 Airstrikes in the President's First Term Cause Death and Destruction From Iraq to Somalia | Alternet


Then there is his total and abject capitulation on the mid east peace process. I think the average attitude towards the Obama administration in the Muslim world would be either a disappointment, or a threat.

According to Susan Rice the investigation into Benghazie-Gate talking points is a "Bigger Tragedy" than the actual terrorism attack:

@WZ - YouTube

Yep...she actually said that. Wonder how many people the investigation killed, eh?

The Fast n Furious 'scandal' was a monumental flop, so now the attack dogs of the right want to try and extract the maximum scandal available from Benghazigate- to, by and large, public apathy- those boys just plain cry 'wolf' too often. That is my somewhat unsympathetic assessment- but am I being unfair, or over simplifying? This article at least tries to explain:-

Understanding the GOP’s Benghazi Obsession

Benghazi is starting to resemble the “Fast and Furious” scandal, which consumed the right’s attention for months even as voters and the media yawned.

So why does the GOP hammer away? There are a few explanations.

-One is the real anger many conservatives feel over the idea that Obama was not entirely forthcoming about the nature of the attacks: Obama did reference Benghazi in a Sept. 12 Rose Garden statement that broadly discussed terrorism but did not draw a more explicit connection until weeks after.

-There’s also the lottery-ticket theory. Harping at Benghazi may not be a short-term winner in the polls. But sustained pressure could yield some smoking gun

-And don’t discount the resentment Republicans feel toward the media, which they believe has sided with the Obama team... There is a sense among reporters that there’s no deeper scandal at the root, and therefore that it’s been fully aired and it’s time to move on,” says Peter Feaver, a former George W. Bush national-security official now at Duke University.

-Finally, congressional politics in particular is driven by more than national polls. Most Americans may not see Benghazi as a Watergate for our times. But hardcore Republicans, whipped up by conservative media, certainly do, and they are egging on their elected officials. Some of whom, notably including McCain’s fellow Benghazi-obsessive Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, are sweating the prospect of a primary challenge. There’s nothing like some feisty Obama-bashing to buffer the right flank.

Read more: Understanding Republicans

Originally Posted by sabang

Benghazi is starting to resemble the “Fast and Furious” scandal, which consumed the right’s attention for months even as voters and the media yawned.

The media yawned because its covering up another scandal for Obama. You really don't get that yet? At any rate, some more data is trickling out even tho 'What does it matter'?

"The White House plans to give the Senate Intelligence Committee access to emails next week related to the controversial CIA talking points about the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, Fox News reported Friday.

Citing a congressional source, the network said the administration had agreed to a request from committee members to review the emails.




Republican lawmakers have charged that the talking points on the Sept. 11, 2012, attack were deliberately watered down and provided an inaccurate account of what really happened when delivered on Sunday talk shows by United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice five days after the attack.

The source told Fox that the committee has already seen ways in which the talking points were changed from their original version, with words like al-Qaida stripped out, but it’s not certain which draft of the document the committee will actually review."

Sources for this piece found here and here

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

The media yawned because its covering up another scandal for Obama

Not quite up to the level of institutional collapse that occured during the run up to the Iraq war when the press went to sleep and allowed the Bush machine to run amok without challenge. Yawn indeed.

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

The media yawned because its covering up another scandal for Obama

Not quite up to the level of institutional collapse that occured during the run up to the Iraq war when the press went to sleep and allowed the Bush machine to run amok without challenge. Yawn indeed.

Different times.

Bush was popular then with his actions re 9/11 so yes, the press was relatively quiet other than reporting on that so-called 'outed' CIA gal whose husband had returned from Africa with a report of no sale of WMD's.

Say it isn't so!

Senators complain after getting´worthless´ redacted version ofBenghazi talking points.

But the first batch of documents contained hundreds of pages that were of no use, the source said. “It was so redacted that there was no information whatsoever,” said the source, who spoke to Fox on the condition they not be identified. “There were some documents that were 100 pages with every word on the page redacted. They were worthless.”

Read the whole thing here

The most transparent administration ever!

No conspiracy, eh?

Graham: Benghazi Survivors Told By Administration “To Be Quiet"

”
"What Does It Matter? Clinton

Sen. Lindsey Graham, in an interview with Fox News, alleged that the injured survivors of the Benghazi terror attack have been “told to be quiet” and feel they can’t come forward to tell their stories — escalating his push for more information about survivors who have never been publicly identified.

The White House is denying any attempt to exert pressure on them.
“I’m sure that the White House is not preventing anyone from speaking,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said, when asked about the survivors.

But Graham told Fox News, “the bottom line is they feel that they can’t come forth, they’ve been told to be quiet.”

“We cannot let this administration or any other administration get away with hiding from the American people and Congress, people who were there in real time to tell the story,” Graham said.

Graham continued to voice concern about the inaccurate or incomplete accounts that came from the Obama administration in the days following the attack. He is among a handful of Republican lawmakers pressing for access to and more information about the survivors."

Move Along. Nothing To See Here

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Sen. Lindsey Graham, in an interview with Fox News, alleged that the injured survivors of the Benghazi terror attack have been “told to be quiet” and feel they can’t come forward to tell their stories

No need for Sen. Graham to allege. Simply have the injured survivors state publicly they have been told to be quiet. Come on Fox, get them in front of your cameras.

B'waah, the polls don't tell me what I wanna hear. They must be deliberately biased by the libbie media.
B'waah, the eyewitnesses won't tell me what I wanna hear. They must be being muzzled by the Whitehouse.
It's called Projection, booner. Gay Lindsey and demented John seem to be in a competition as to who can make the biggest muppets out of themselves right now (although a late starter, Ted Cruz, is giving them a good run in the Clown Stakes). It's pretty obvious that all they care about is hanging on to their Senate seat. McCain has no life outside the Beltway, and while Lindsey may well, he certainly doesn't want his socially conservative constituency to be told about it.

^
Got it backwards, sabang. Media Not Clamoring To Interview Benghazi Survivors.

Like Norton said, it looks like it's up to Fox to get them in front of the camera as the State Media certainly doesn't want any blowback from their God, eh?

I really hate people that stifle useful debate on a topic by bringing in little things like "facts". Curse you, sir.