Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 4 of 19      Prev   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   Next   »
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,558
Reply with quote  #91 
Exactly, dewy wants to make it political, we need to make it criminal. 

Keep politicizing American deaths dewy, the readers should be amused.  You should stay out of gun control and foreign policy thread because you can tell they are not your stongpoints,  Stay on the social issues and you do ok, spreading wealth evenly is your forte but gun control and foreign policy not so much, your takes stink. edited: 

Why don't we ask the author of the thread what kind of thread it is instead of you telling us dewy.  Griz where you at?

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 11,012
Reply with quote  #92 
Dewey - you're wrong.  This is a Benghazi thread.  Did you read the title?  If you want to start a thread on previous administrations, feel free.
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 8,290
Reply with quote  #93 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
pabar - This is not just a Benghazi thread.  It's a political thread aimed at questioning Hillary Clinton's credentials by asking if we should consider Benghazi when deciding her probable candidacy.  Yes, just like we should consider the history of the GOP and their failures in our decision process.  Maybe we should have a campaign, or a thread, that only includes the tragedies under Democrat watch and ignore the others.  I read it more as an election question asking what voters should consider and I did my best to answer.  I think I remained on topic but I'll let you take it where you think it should go from here.


I agree with KIIR that this should be criminal.  However, just like the number of admin officials who have lied under oath to Congress, nothing will happen, because that would require that Eric Holder, himself a criminal perjurer, actually enforce the law.  We all know that will not happen.

Should Hillary run, you can expect this to be an issue.  It goes straight to character when she knowingly propogated the lie, after her and the POTUS were briefed right away.


keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,558
Reply with quote  #94 
how surprising where the conversation of the day plays out

Almost another page of birth certificate nutspeak

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #95 
There were at least two members here who incorrectly described the Senate report and I know how important words are to most of you.  The Senate report said the loss of the four Americans was "likely preventable".  I think there's a distinction there.  I could ask your opinions as to the difference between preventable and likely preventable but that practice isn't getting me very far.  I know the distinction but I'll let you guys go first.  I'm going to a movie.  [wave]
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,558
Reply with quote  #96 

Did your wife let you go see the last survivor or you seeing a Kardashian movie?

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 11,012
Reply with quote  #97 
The degree of difference between preventable and likely preventable is surely in the eye of the beholder.  The bottom line is that if the State department, lead by Hillary Clinton, had listened to the pleas of the embassy staff, their deaths were preventable.  Hillary Clinton, as head of State, is ultimately responsible for their deaths.  No different than the CEO of Target is ultimately responsible for the data breach they recently experienced.
spazsdad

Registered:
Posts: 5,068
Reply with quote  #98 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
The Senate report said the loss of the four Americans was "likely preventable".  I think there's a distinction there.

One thing is certain. With Obama and Hillary in charge it was most likely unpreventable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by keepinitreal

Did your wife let you go see the last survivor or you seeing a Kardashian movie?

More likely something by Michael Moore

__________________
#SCOTUS
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,558
Reply with quote  #99 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spazsdad
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
The Senate report said the loss of the four Americans was "likely preventable".  I think there's a distinction there.

One thing is certain. With Obama and Hillary in charge it was most likely unpreventable.

With obama and hc in charge those folks didn't have a chance..the libs want to put hc in charge of more American deaths
__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
woody

Registered:
Posts: 9,025
Reply with quote  #100 
Dewey, please attempt to blow up the floaties, and struggle to edge your way out of the deep end of the pool, and attempt to casually suck down gulps of koolaid flavored pool water, pretending it is a normal function, as you struggle to keep your head above water in the shallow end of the pool. Do so without showing any signs of desperation to the casual observer who is watching the scene unfold from the security of the deep end. while silently, and effortlessly treading the deep water.
__________________
Rats flee from the sinking vessel. They traverse nimbly upon a rope, safely cleated to the dock, that is private enterprise. Socialism is dead, and tits up in the water. A bloated, death show, for rubberneckers of all classes to view.

"IT'S GOOD TO BE DA KING"
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,875
Reply with quote  #101 
Interesting report from Greta Von Susteren re efforts to block Fox News reporting in aftermath of Benghazi.

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/01/20/greta-van-susteren-recounts-administrations-shocking-attempt-to-persuade-her-to-kill-benghazi-coverage-95517
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 8,290
Reply with quote  #102 
Remember also reporters Rosen and Atkisson who were spied on by this admin in an attempt to shut them down.

Let's just put Greta's thing here so folks don't have to follow the link:

And then as I was sitting at my desk thinking about the reporting since September 2012, I thought about the weirdest of all and the worst of all for me personally!  I remembered a disturbing phone call from a good friend in the Obama Administration.  I have known this friend for years.  The call was a short time after 9/11 (maybe Oct. 2012?) In the call, my friend told me that my colleague Jennifer Griffin, who was aggressively reporting on Benghazi, was wrong and that, as a favor to me, my friend in the Administration was telling me so that I could tell Jennifer so that she did not ruin her career.   My friend was telling me to tell Jennifer to stop her reporting.  Ruin her career?

In 20 plus years, I have never received a call to try and shut down a colleague – not that I even could – this was a first.   Here is what I know:  Jennifer is a class act….experienced..and a very responsible journalist.  One of the absolute best in the business – no axe to grind, she just wants the facts.

I told my friend before I go to Jennifer telling her she is wrong,  I need proof she is wrong, strong proof and you need to be specific  - what are you saying she is getting wrong?  We went around and around — including the statement again that this was just a call as a favor to Jennifer and me to save Jennifer’s career from reporting incorrect information.  I got no proof.  Zero.   I smelled a rat.  Favor to me?  Hardly.  My friend was trying to use me.   I feel bad that a friend did that to me, tried to use me for a dirty reason.   I knew then — and it is now confirmed by  BIPARTISAN Senate Intelligence Committee — Jennifer was getting her facts right.   I think it is really low for the Administration to stoop this low.

ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,875
Reply with quote  #103 
Moving this post over to Benghazi, where it belongs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverInBlue
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
>Secondly, did you know Ambassador Stevens turned down additional security?


We'll that certainly is an extremely convenient "anonymous source" statement, not supported by any of the testimony provided under oath. Curious also that Gen Ham retired and apparently won't testify, so the anonymous source statement can't be verified.

In light of this, we still don't "know" that "Stevens turned down additional security."

If it's a fact, why hasn't anyone testified as such. And far as I know, the State Dept didn't even raise these conversations in their own defense, despite it being critical to the discussion of security. Pretty easy to question the legitimacy of this claim by anonymous.


To follow up on this, Gregory Hicks, our #2 in Libya at the time, has responded to allegations that Steven turned down additional security.

http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304302704579332732276330284?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop&mobile=y

Ex

To sum up: Chris Stevens was not responsible for the reduction in security personnel. His requests for additional security were denied or ignored. Officials at the State and Defense Departments in Washington made the decisions that resulted in reduced security. Sen. Lindsey Graham stated on the Senate floor last week that Chris "was in Benghazi because that is where he was supposed to be doing what America wanted him to do: Try to hold Libya together." He added, "Quit blaming the dead guy."

------

Hopefully this relegates Dewey's uninformed statement to the trash heap of liberal obfuscation. Expect many more as they continue their effort to steer clinton clear of this event.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #104 
Nobody I know is trying to suggest Ambassador Stevens is in any way responsible for the tragic deaths at the Consulate.  The only point being made here is that the Ambassador turned down some offers for increased security.  It appears to be a fact.  That said, nobody I know is trying to say whether it was appropriate to consider his refusal or not.  Those with much more expertise than I'll ever have can make that determination.  I'm simply pointing out the entire event was much more complex than some here want to describe.  It's very clear to me that only folks on the Right are searching out someone to blame for these tragic events.  I have no doubt it will go on until the 2016 election is over.
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 11,012
Reply with quote  #105 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
Nobody I know is trying to suggest Ambassador Stevens is in any way responsible for the tragic deaths at the Consulate.  The only point being made here is that the Ambassador turned down some offers for increased security.  It appears to be a fact.  That said, nobody I know is trying to say whether it was appropriate to consider his refusal or not.  Those with much more expertise than I'll ever have can make that determination.  I'm simply pointing out the entire event was much more complex than some here want to describe.  It's very clear to me that only folks on the Right are searching out someone to blame for these tragic events.  I have no doubt it will go on until the 2016 election is over.


Really?

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2014/01/18/piers-morgan-blames-ambassador-stevens-for-his-own-death-in-benghazi-n1780769

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/01/109262-wait-msnbc-contributor-just-blame-ambassador-chris-stevens-death/

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/10/29/liberal-host-blames-ambassador-stevens-for-his-own-murder-86135

Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #106 
Nope.  I see Piers and the others questioning if the Ambassador gave sufficient weight to the serious threats around him but none of these folks are blaming him for the deaths of these brave American citizens.  I've already agreed some better decisions could and should have been made, regarding this incident, and there's no doubt we came up short as a Country in protecting these people.  Unfortunately, it isn't the first miscalculation we've ever made and it won't be the last.  Beyond this, it's nothing but partisan gamesmanship to try and blame some individual for the tragic deaths of those in Libya.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,558
Reply with quote  #107 
"Nobody I know is trying to suggest Ambassador Stevens is in any way responsible for the tragic deaths at the Consulate."

The great semantic master seems to not be able to understand plain English

From Piers Morgan, via pabar link

 Morgan: When you actually get into the weeds of this pretty lengthy report, it also is very clear that one of the people who may be most to blame for not reacting to the threat and for increasing security despite being urged to repeatedly was the ambassador himself. And obviously you don't want to speak ill of a man who was killed in such appalling circumstances, but is it fair to also say that he as the ambassador should have done more to react to direct warnings that he was given on numerous occasions?

Isn't Piers participating in gamesmanship by pointing fingers?  So it goes by the hypocrites on the left.  At least Piers is VERY CLEAR as compared to those on the left here who are always stating in what a confused state they are.

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 11,012
Reply with quote  #108 
Dewey - the actual words that came out of Piers Morgan's mouth.  Listen to them again and listen to him say. "one of the people who may be most to blame . . . was the ambassador himself."

One of the greatest strengths of those on the left is the ability to repeat ad infinitem something that is untrue until people just give up and agree or walk away.  It is really a stunning quality and one that Dewey has mastered.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,558
Reply with quote  #109 
Read this lengthy pdf file and sure didn't come up with the conclusions that dewy and his crew of TV pundits twisted for the readers.  I really liked the reading starting on page 71, better than the fiction that is disseminated as 'fact' by the loony left.

http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/benghazi2014/benghazi.pdf



__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #110 
Wow.  You clarify the proper perspective to use against some misinformation bandied about by our right leaning UCS friends and they wake up all in a tizzy.  Let me use the narrative these same UCS friends repeat constantly, here inside our forum, in order to further make my case.

If a family is killed by an intruder, will our UCS friends blame them for their own deaths?  Of course not.  However, will they question if the family was ill prepared by not taking advantage of their second amendment rights and arming themselves for greater protection?  Of course they will, as they repeatedly do now.  If and when such an event occurs, the posts from the Right emphasizing to readers about the risks they are taking if they don't buy a gun will be repeated ad nauseum.  Will this cause others to believe the family was responsible for their own death?  I would hope not but apparently some people are more easily confused than others.

That's exactly what these pundits are doing with regards to Benghazi.  It's fair to ask if questions by Piers and others were appropriate but, when you consider our consulate in Benghazi was surely a much more dangerous place than the homes of most American citizens, it's much more understandable to question if the Consulate was properly prepared for danger than it would be to question an American family living in the comfort of their own home.  To suggest these pundits are blaming the Ambassador for the deaths in Benghazi is preposterous, to say the least.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,558
Reply with quote  #111 
Preposterous coming from you doesn't mean much.  You are a pundit in your own right with nothing but blanks in your barrel.  Read the report and then opine with a little knowledge instead of shooting blanks.  You wrote 3 paragraphs and didn't say shiite.
__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,558
Reply with quote  #112 
Follow along on page 73,

The Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs, Charlene Lamb, was asked to speak to the Benghazi Senate Committee on 3 occasions and on ALL 3 occasions she refused.  We all saw what a mockery that hillary cliton made of the inquiry.  Where in the world in light of the blatant stonewalling by the State Dept. does the left leaning libtards get the notion that The Ambassador was to blame for his own death?

The readers would like to know,
Where in the world in light of the blatant stonewalling by the State Dept. does the left leaning libtards get the notion that The Ambassador was to blame for his own death?  

pabar, help me out, who was the first to spread this diabolical 'story' that dewy likes to repeat, I know that he couldn't answer the straightforward question.
 

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 11,012
Reply with quote  #113 
It was first reported in May of 2013 by McClatchy newspapers citing anonymous government sources.

It is a very dubious report and does not address the possibility that, if Stevens did turn down the offer of more security, it was very likely him communicating directives he received from the state department.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,558
Reply with quote  #114 
So no known sources??  And that is ok for someone trying to sway 50,000 readers with their 'debate'?  I would like to know why dewy is spreading unsubstantiated untruths from unnamed sources? (as he did in post #104 "It appears to be a fact" and #106 when he spread the untruth instead of question the validity of the untruth)
__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,558
Reply with quote  #115 
"When you actually get into the weeds of this pretty lengthy report"
PM

I got into the weeds and did not conclude Ambassador Stephens was culpable as dewy and piers morgan state.  This is exactly how the left will dissect a story and then throw out the strawman.  
Their way of answering the tough questions on the false narratives and false talking points by a failed administration is to blame the dead victim.  Despicable tactics by hillary, dewy, piers and the whole lot of them.

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #116 
Quote:
Originally Posted by keepinitreal
I got into the weeds and did not conclude Ambassador Stephens was culpable as dewy and piers morgan state.


Every now and then, kiir makes an untruthful comment to see if he can get me to respond.  Neither I, nor anyone else I listen to, is blaming Ambassador Stevens for what happened in Benghazi.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,558
Reply with quote  #117 
From page 74 of the report

"We know from the testimony of Eric Nordstrom, who served as the Regional Security Officer in Libya until shortly before the attacks, that Ms. Lamb and other senior State Department officials were unreceptive to repeated requests from the Libyan mission regarding security personnel in both Tripoli and Benghazi"

Hello, ANYONE want to 'splain how piers morgan and the left want to now blame the dead ambassador AFTER the report.  

In the weeds indeed, where the left prefer to dwell

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,558
Reply with quote  #118 
From page 74 again

...."Yet, when the Libyan mission transmitted its official request for additional security personnel on March, 28, 2012, the pushback from Ms. Lamb's office was swift and significant"

Page 76
"Ultimately, however, the final responsibility for security at diplomatic facilities lies with the former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.  Because the temporary mission Facility in Benghazi did not meet the security standards set by the State Department, it would have required a waiver to be occupied.  Although 
certain waivers of the standards could have been approved at a lower level, other 
departures, such as the co-location requirement, could only be approved by the 
Secretary of State.  At the end of the day, she was responsible for ensuring the 
safety of all Americans serving in our diplomatic facilities. Her failure to do so 
clearly made a difference in the lives of the four murdered Americans and their 
families." 
 

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,558
Reply with quote  #119 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
Beyond this, it's nothing but partisan gamesmanship to try and blame some individual for the tragic deaths of those in Libya.


I stated in the very first post on this page that dewy was attempting to make the discussion political, for his enjoyment I presume, he's still trying.  Again, why hasn't someone been fired over this total failure in the State Dept. and others?

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,558
Reply with quote  #120 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
Quote:
Originally Posted by keepinitreal
I got into the weeds and did not conclude Ambassador Stephens was culpable as dewy and piers morgan state.


Every now and then, kiir makes an untruthful comment to see if he can get me to respond.  Neither I, nor anyone else I listen to, is blaming Ambassador Stevens for what happened in Benghazi.


you stated to the contrary in post #104.  Stick to the facts dewy

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.