Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 19      Prev   1   2   3   4   5   Next   »
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 5,010
Reply with quote  #31 

I would feel that the far right outrage over the 4 ambassador lives lost in Benghazi was legit and not based solely on politics if this same outrage and dogged determination to assign blame to individuals in the administration if this same outrage was shown by the far right when the 61 ambassadors were killed between 2004 and 2008. I voted Bush both times and saw the far left groan and moan about each case. Just as much whining but our technology did not give a platform to so many. A fraction of the forums and blogs and political tv shows. Many of the current political pinheads and platforms for them were just starting or had not started yet. Tv and internet of 2000 is light years different than what it is today. The outrage from far left was there....it just wasn't seen 24/7 on liberal tv since msnbc had just started in 1996. Fox news began in 1996 as well and was defending Bush nightly. The faux outrage is similar to the Faux outrage from Al Sharpton over treyvon martin case. Benghazi was not the first time ambassadors were killed overseas and admin had egg on it's face and martin was not the first black teen killed. Both sides tell the other to "get over it". Supporters of each side do not want it to end.

Topic came up at lunch with a few of us at outback steakhouse. My friend said she was outraged. She was quoting stuff from her tea party site. She named people involved, and all the details she heard from theblaze, beck tv, and fox news and online. But I asked her the most important thing about being outraged over a death---what is the name of the people who died. She did not know. So I said she was not concerned over who died but that the deaths could be used for a political agenda. Same with martin case. Benghazi gives a green light to attack Obama and try to derail the Hillary Clinton express......but the reality of it is the middle don't care and this for 2016 and will vote for whomever not based on politics or bias, the left don't care and are voting her anyways, and the right are not voting for her so they are preaching to the choir. I am not voting for her so it doesn't matter what she does good and the bad doesn't make me not vote for her more. But I also do not support faux outrage. Obama is not getting removed and Hillary won't lose unless we unite the party and concentrate on our candidates and what they actually bring to the table. We cannot have another mcccain nor Romney. Anyone but Obama did not work. Anyone but Hillary will not either.

If outrage is genuine and not based on politics then outrage is consistent. Like it was for okc bombing, 9/11, boston bombing, etc.
Here are simular incidents as Benghazi that had the left fired up to boot Bush or keep him from being re-elected------

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-Qaida 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-Qaida 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-Qaida 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.

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-Qaida-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.


__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
woody

Registered:
Posts: 8,821
Reply with quote  #32 
In any of the above mentioned attacks, did the State Department with White House approval, knowingly, and continually lie to the press and the public about the origins of the attacks? Did in any of these cases, the State Department, and the Commander in Chief deny requested protection before and during the embassy attack? Why would troops be told REPEATEDLY to stand down, and leave embassy staff to be slaughtered? Is it wrong to ask these questions?
__________________
Anarcho Capitalism. Get some, and no you can't have any of my money to live off of you Socialist Democrat.

"IT'S GOOD TO BE DA KING"
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,842
Reply with quote  #33 
Darrel Issa sent a letter to Kerry asking hi to make all the survivors and other personnel from Benghazi available for questioning.

Kerry recently said he wouldn't so so.

Issa today said if Kerry refuses to comply by Sept 20, then subpoenas will be issued.

Tick tock
Tick tock
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,842
Reply with quote  #34 
Today the White House observed a minute of silence for the victims of 9/11/2001.


They also observed 525,600 minutes of silence for the victims of 9/11/2012.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,000
Reply with quote  #35 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverInBlue
Today the White House observed a minute of silence for the victims of 9/11/2001. They also observed 525,600 minutes of silence for the victims of 9/11/2012.


there should be shame and we hear nothing but silence because it's a fake scandal.  3 years can't happen soon enough

__________________
"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: 8,821
Reply with quote  #36 
And the former SOS, the presumed candidate for POTUS, should be hauled back before a Congressional Committee, with LOTS of defense council, and State Department, interference runners in tow. Should happen about a year and a half before the Democratic Presidential Primaries.  
__________________
Anarcho Capitalism. Get some, and no you can't have any of my money to live off of you Socialist Democrat.

"IT'S GOOD TO BE DA KING"
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 9,543
Reply with quote  #37 
Disgusting cowards.  Democrats walked out of a Benghazi congressional hearing just as the families of the victims were set to testify.
woody

Registered:
Posts: 8,821
Reply with quote  #38 
That's how they roll.
__________________
Anarcho Capitalism. Get some, and no you can't have any of my money to live off of you Socialist Democrat.

"IT'S GOOD TO BE DA KING"
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,000
Reply with quote  #39 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pabar61
Disgusting cowards.  Democrats walked out of a Benghazi congressional hearing just as the families of the victims were set to testify.


unbelievable, and there are idiots on this forum that ask why sometimes we get emotional, upset or pissed off.  calling them cowards is being kind
POS more like it

__________________
"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" 
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #40 
I think even POS is too nice.    Just gross.    Not to mention if the repubs had done this it would have been front page news for a week at least, since its dems its totally ignored by lamestream media.  
__________________
Susan
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,842
Reply with quote  #41 
Benghazi’s Al Qaeda Connection

The Obama administration has been loathe to draw any connections in public between al Qaeda and the Benghazi attacks on September 11, 2012. A new State Department designation of an Egyptian terrorist however makes that link. Eli Lake reports.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/07/benghazi-s-al-qaeda-connection.html
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 9,543
Reply with quote  #42 
FIB - this can't be right.  Remember, it was a video that incited a spontaneous riot.
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,842
Reply with quote  #43 
Here is what we know now about Benghazi. And there is more to come. Give yourself a few minutes to read this. [smile]

http://leestranahan.com/the-benghazi-cover-up/
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,000
Reply with quote  #44 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbmom1812
I think even POS is too nice.    Just gross.    Not to mention if the repubs had done this it would have been front page news for a week at least, since its dems its totally ignored by lamestream media.  


[angel]

__________________
"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" 
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 8,184
Reply with quote  #45 
It made me sad to see a post of hers. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by keepinitreal
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbmom1812
I think even POS is too nice.    Just gross.    Not to mention if the repubs had done this it would have been front page news for a week at least, since its dems its totally ignored by lamestream media.  


[angel]
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,842
Reply with quote  #46 
Reminder: Obama slept trough this, then flew to Las Vegas for a fundraiser.


STATE DEPARTMENT
'Pleading' distress calls made from US consulate on night of Benghazi attack

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/11/20/pleading-distress-calls-made-from-us-consulate-on-night-benghazi-attack/
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,842
Reply with quote  #47 
This story about the State Dept / CIA coverup of Benghazi has been out there for some time. The fact that CNN is now running with it is huge. And they have a source inside.

http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/01/exclusive-dozens-of-cia-operatives-on-the-ground-during-benghazi-attack/

This going mainstream media is bad news for Obama, and even worse news for Clinton. She will be unelectable once the truth finally comes out.
bluedog

Registered:
Posts: 9,725
Reply with quote  #48 
Quote:
...........and even worse news for Clinton. She will be unelectable once the truth finally comes out.


The numbers are in Hillary's favor...The entitlement vote doesn't care about Benghazi....They care only about their check.....And, their numbers are growing....
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,842
Reply with quote  #49 
A lot will change in three years. Just look at the past two months for Obama.
TheHammer

Registered:
Posts: 11,135
Reply with quote  #50 
people wake up to the fact that those who voted Obama in will also vote Hillary in. 
democrats have only her and republicans don't have the number.
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,842
Reply with quote  #51 
Hammer, wake up to the reality that those who voted Obama in would not vote to reelect him today. Democrats are losing ground, and the real consequences of OBAMACARE haven't even been felt by most Americans... yet.

And people know that Hillary will lie like a dirty scoundrel to get elected, just like Obama did.
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,842
Reply with quote  #52 
Hammer, a Dem polling firm just released a poll showing Christie leading Clinton in PA 48-44. Which is interesting b/c Clinton beat him in his home state of NJ in recent exit polls. Of course a Dem Booker won that, so obviously more Dems represented. Point being there's a long way to go and people have yet to take a hard look at Clinton's legacy of failure and lack of accomplishment. It will matter

Of course Clinton has the NSA, IRS, DOJ, etc to do her dirty work so that might matter too.
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,842
Reply with quote  #53 
The NYT published a story on Benghazi yesterday, downplaying terrorism and touting that tired old video line that Obama and company were lying about.

The immediate reaction was that the article was to provide cover for Obama, and more importantly, for Clinton's dash to the White House. The backlash to the intent of the article was so harsh that an editor today came out and said that they haven't yet decided on an endorsement for 2016. Which was met with another wave of derision.

Today, the accuracy of the article itself being attacked, both here in the US and overseas.

Now, the author says the NYT had a reporter on the ground in Benghazi talking to the 'perpetrators' during the attack. Which itself begs a few questions.

Needless to say, the puff piece isn't playing out so well for the Times. Links soon.
CoachB25

Registered:
Posts: 2,234
Reply with quote  #54 
This is the NY Times attempt to wash away Hillary's record in the event.  I've heard both R and D congressmen say that the Times article left out some key events and messed with the time line.  Also, the name the group took is straight from Bin Laden.  That was information found from the raid after killing him.  In that information, Bin Laden said that they had to re-market Al Queda and so, with these name changes, that would set up new networks that would be harder to trace. 

The NY Times is not a journalistic media outlet.  It is a shill for the Democratic Party and nothing more. 
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #55 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachB25


The NY Times is not a journalistic media outlet.  It is a shill for the Democratic Party and nothing more. 


CoachB - You're taking yourself way out on a limb with this opinion as this long time news organization ranks high up on the list worldwide.  In any event, the GOP dismissed the Mullen report and they'll surely dismiss the facts presented in the NYT investigation.  They have no other alternative.  However, while the NYT piece does give some credit to the video and notes there were no Al Qaeda as we would normally define them involved, it did not exonerate the Administration when it came to several other important areas.  I think there's enough objectivity in this report to squelch the partisan or liar accusations.
CoachB25

Registered:
Posts: 2,234
Reply with quote  #56 
Dewey, you missed the news all week.  There were several members of the Democratic Party who said that the NY Times report was inaccurate.  I've heard at least 3 different Democrats in their own words say so this week.  They are all on the sub committee investigating the event.  More that than have spoken out. 
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #57 
CoachB - Listen to Democrat Adam Schiff yourself.

He agrees with what the intelligence said and then clarified it with these words...

Schiff, a Democratic member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said the intelligence indicated that al Qaeda did play a role in the attack. The intelligence community knows this, he said, from insights gleaned from eavesdropping on the night of the attack. Speaking of the Times report, Schiff said “they did not have the same access to people who were not aware they were being listened to. They were heavily reliant obviously on people they interviewed who had a reason to provide the story they did.” But Schiff also said sometimes eavesdropping has its limits as well. “Sometimes though the intelligence which has the advantage of hearing to people when they don’t know they are being listening to, that can be misleading as well, when people make claims, they boast of things they were not involved in for various purposes,” he said.

Mr. Schiff agreed with what the intelligence said but didn't agree it had to be accurate.  He was just confirming the fact there were differing analysis.


I think the clear point in all this is how determining precisely what happened, particularly immediately following the event, is a very difficult thing to do and the accusations of this Administration deliberately misleading the people on the Sunday shows was totally unfair.  There was a lot to figure out and lying for the sake of a few days would do nobody any good. 
woody

Registered:
Posts: 8,821
Reply with quote  #58 
But lying for weeks during a Presidential Campaign might do an incumbent President some good.
__________________
Anarcho Capitalism. Get some, and no you can't have any of my money to live off of you Socialist Democrat.

"IT'S GOOD TO BE DA KING"
GrizzlyFan

Registered:
Posts: 2,049
Reply with quote  #59 
We now know that Obama had a pre-scheduled meeting at 5:00pm with Panetta and other than that NEVER even spoke to Panetta or Gen. Dempsy the entire time during the Benghazi attack.
Hillary didn't speak with either of them that night as well.
We also know that in spite of the fact that they had no idea of how long the attack would last, NOT ONE SINGLE MILITARY ASSET was put in motion to go help our people. This attack could have lasted for 3 days! Yet they didn't fire up even one fighter jet, or dispatch one single troop!
Upon hearing that our Ambassador was missing, Obama didn't contact Panetta or Dempsy, no instead he went to bed!!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/07/obama-was-absent-during-benghazi-attack-shocking-truths-emerge-at-second-senate-libya-hearing/

__________________
If Obamacare is such a good thing, why did he have to lie about it to get it passed?
CoachB25

Registered:
Posts: 2,234
Reply with quote  #60 
O'Reilly just gave a great Talking Points about this very topic and presented the position that the NY Times is a secular Progressive Paper that has an agenda.  I reported that earlier here.  He also presented the opinion that this is to cover for Hillary and her run for President.  Jill Abramson who leads the editorial department of the NY Times is outwardly progressive.  To his point O'Reilly pointed out the Mortar attach on a compound 1/2 mile away and all of the RPGs fired at the Embassy.  Left out of the NY Times story was the direct link to Al Qaeda presented to Congressional investigating committee.  That would include, as I pointed out, Bin Laden's documents linking the two radical Islamic groups. 
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.