T1B

One of the most disgraceful episodes I can ever remember... and it is ongoing.

1) Despite multiple pleedings from embassy that they were in danger and desperately needed security upgrades, they got none.

2) When the attack was occurring, no military help was sent. What Barry was doing is anyone's guess, because his actions that night have never been revealed. What did he do and when did he go to bed?

3) Despite knowing within minutes that it was a planned terror attack, the admin blatantly lied (for weeks) that it was a spontaneous attack caused by an anti-mooslim youtube video.

"The media" (save for FAUX NEWS) has, since the attack occurred, done it's best to push this under the rug.
To this day, they continue to minimize it as much as they can, or ignore it completely.

Head must roll.

Long overdue.

Heads should roll, but they won't. Wonder who Soetero was in bed with while those brave men were being slaughtered. He lied, men died.

Sounds like a Fox News problem. No one else cares.

88 wrote: 11. For the most part, Team Obama has won this issue. The Press doesn't care. Most of the American People do not care. What difference does it make anyway?

12. More shit will come out that shows that the White House went into serious political CYA mode after the shit hit the fan, but no one will care.

Nobody on the Left (or even anywhere near the middle) wants to hear it from a bunch of Bush lovers (or even onetime Bush lovers). A small but vocal minority of the Right see it for what it is... shitty decisions in the fog of war. That leaves you with a bunch of mouthbreathers and a few misguided souls. I'm not implying that YOU don't already know this, I'm just pointing it out to the mouthbreathers.

Moving Sale wrote:...shitty decisions in the fog of war.

A. There was no fog.

B. There was no war.

The decisions were shitty enough, though, I'll grant you that much. Shillary and Obonenose were in full possession of facts at all times and, at every turn, they made the wrong decisions. Then, when the inevitable happened and it all blew up in Chris Stevens' face, they concocted a lie about a protest that never happened over a video nobody ever saw to cover their tracks.

Finally when called on it, Shillary couldn't have given a fuck less. "What difference does it make?"

That's right. What difference does it make that her complete and utter incompetence was directly responsible for the easily preventable deaths of a US Ambassador, 3 other State Dept. employees and the looting of a secure diplomatic facility?

Oh, by the way, what did we ever do about this attack? Anything? Those guys are wandering around freely. Giving interviews to CNN. Fucking goats. Planning more attacks. Pretty much doing whatever the fuck they want.

Great job.

Moving Sale wrote:I'm just pointing it out to the mouthbreathers.

And who should appear?
Mouth breather number one.

Yea it's a Quagmire alright. :wink:

trev wrote:Sounds like a Fox News problem. No one else cares.

No one?

Have you listened to the family members of those left to be slaughtered?

No one really gives a shit, I honestly doubt you do either pops other then baiting here.

No, I find it stunning that people somehow don't care about this.

Do you want to try to explain the actions of the administration??

88 wrote: And that is why we have a liberal press, an uneducated public and the absolutely shitty, lying, ineffective and incompetent national government we deserve.

A) We also have a Conservative press. Not sure what this has to do with my post.
B) We have a stupid electorate because public education for all (most) is a bad idea.
C) You are absolutely right that partisanship is (has?) ruined DC. Maybe I should be up in arms over this, but after Bush I'm just not ready to listen to a bunch of chickenhawks bitch and moan about a few dead Americans. I'm calloused over.

poptart wrote: Do you want to try to explain the actions of the administration??

They fucked up. Happy now?

They have not admitted "fucking up."
They've maintained that Susan Rice went on the Sunday talk shows days after the attack and told the American people what the admin believed to be true -- even though they KNEW that what she was telling all of us was a total crock of shit.
They still maintain this.
lol

It's not a mere "fuck up" not to send help to your own people when you know they are under attack.
It's gutless and despicable beyond words.

And no sufficient explanation for not giving more security to our people over there -- when they pleaded for it, before the attack, has ever been given.


You failed, Moving Bowel.

State Department Spokeswoman Marie Harf
said that claims the Soetoro Administration
sought to cover up or spin what happened
is... 100% false.


Oh well, that's that.

Marie looks like one of those government officials who in a sane world would be selling shoes at Payless. Case closed because she said so ? God help the USA.

And here's the guy who is up to the task.

Wolfman wrote:Marie looks like one of those government officials who in a sane world would be selling shoes at Payless.

How about Spicoli with a haircut... and in a suit.
Where does he belong?






Dude?


ummm...

It is a bit pathetic that these folks can't even speak adult talk. He certainly seems qualified to run a surfboard rental shop at San Clemente beach.

Tommy Vietor is one of the most pathetic pieces of shit to ever be shart out of the Obama Administration. A true spineless ball licker if there ever was one.

Murder as an answer to a political situation eh tard? Any other nazi tactics you want to try Adolf?

Moving Sale wrote:Murder as an answer to a political situation eh tard? Any other nazi tactics you want to try Adolf?

Good comeback, Mr. Godwin.

Yea no need to call out the guy who wants to kill the POTUS. Better to shoot the messenger eh ditch digger?

schmick wrote:

Moving Sale wrote:Murder as an answer to a political situation eh tard? Any other nazi tactics you want to try Adolf?

Eugenics for one, kill off or sterilize all the dwarfs, takers, gimps, libs and other retards so they dont burden the rest of us

Any other questions dimsdale?

Three things about this "phony scandal":
1) There was an ongoing operation in Benghazi to buy weaponry, specifically MANPADS, that had fallen into jihadis' hands and were rumored to be headed to Afghanistan. This was a gray op that the State Dept did not want its' fingerprints on because of the adverse election ramifications it presented to the Obama administration and the risk to Hillary's political aspirations if it went bad. As it always is in life, what can go wrong will go wrong.

2) An unguarded Spec Ops supply depot nearby stocked with US weaponry and vehicles was broken into and looted by jihadi fighters. Nothing has been recovered.

3) The head of the terror cell responsible for the attack was openly entertaining reporters at a local coffee shop/cafe and bragging about what they'd done. He wasn't hiding, he wasn't frightened, he wasn't concerned that either a drone or cruise missile attack was imminent to kill him.

The question you have to ask yourself is why were all these circumstances in play? We certainly had the capability to eliminate the head of that jihadi cell and had the necessary assets in the area, so why not kill the man who directed the attack which killed an ambassador and three of his men? Or nab him and interrogate him? For all his promises to get to the bottom of the fiasco, Obama has stonewalled and resisted any and all attempts to resolve this.

This investigation is LONG overdue.

For what it's worth, here is a long look at the time line:

March 2011: U.S. secretly approves arms shipments from Qatar to Libyan rebels.

May 2011: Al-Qaeda flags raised over Benghazi.

November 2011: Rebel leader Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi admits a significant number of Libyan rebels were al-Qaeda fighters who fought American troops in Iraq.

April 19, 2012: State Department rejects ambassador to Libya’s request for more security personnel.

June 20, 2012: Assassination attempt on the British Ambassador to Libya.

July 9, 2012: Ambassador Stevens asks the State Department for more security personnel.

August 8, 2012: The number of security personnel at Benghazi reduced by State Department.

August 16, 2012: U.S. Site Security in Benghazi alerts the State Department that conditions are perilous.

September 4, 2012: Gallup presidential tracking poll: Obama 47 percent; Romney 46 percent.

September 4–6, 2012: Democratic National Convention (“al-Qaeda decimated; bin Laden is dead and GM is alive; al-Qaeda is on the run”).

September 11, 2012: Ambassador Stevens alerts the State Department that conditions in Benghazi are deteriorating.

3:40 p.m. (D.C. time): Stevens calls deputy chief of mission Greg Hicks in Tripoli and alerts him that the consulate in Benghazi is under attack.

4:00 p.m.: The White House is advised that the consulate is under attack. 10th Special Forces Group in Croatia is three hours away; Brigadier General (Ret.) Robert Lovell, Deputy Director of Intelligence for AFRICOM, later testifies that intelligence knew immediately that it was not a protest but a terrorist attack; no request for aid comes from the State Department.

5:00 p.m.: Defense Secretary Leon Panetta discusses attack with President Obama.

6:00 p.m.: U.S. Embassy in Tripoli advises the White House and the State Department that al-Qaeda affiliate Ansar al-Sharia has claimed responsibility for the attack. CIA deputy director Mike Morrell later testifies that “analysts knew from the get-go that al Qaeda was involved with this attack.”

8:00 p.m.: Greg Hicks calls Clinton and tells her that consulate is under terrorist attack.

10:00 p.m.: Clinton and Obama talk.

10:30 p.m.: Clinton issues a statement linking the attack to an inflammatory internet video.

11:00–11:30 p.m.: Former Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Ty Woods killed.

September 12, 2012: Redacted e-mail from a State Department official says the official advised the Libyan government that the attack was carried out by Ansar al-Sharia. No mention of video.

September 12–15, 2012: CIA drafts several iterations of talking points; contains no known references to video as cause of the attack.

September 13, 2012: State Department memo blames the attack on terrorists.

September 13, 2012: Defense Intelligence Agency assigns blame for the attack on Ansar al-Sharia in Libya. No mention of a video.

September 13, 2012: Clinton condemns violence against U.S. consulate in Libya due to a video.

September 13, 2012: Jay Carney condemns attack due to a video.

September 14, 2012: State Department says the attack was a spontaneous demonstration due to a video.

September 14, 2012: Obama and Clinton receive the families of the fallen as their caskets arrive at Andrews Air Force Base; blame the attack on a video. Clinton tells Ty Woods’s father, Charles, that they will “get” the producer of the video.

September 14, 2012: Jay Carney blames the video.

September 14, 2012, 8:00 p.m.: Deputy national-security adviser Ben Rhodes sends an e-mail regarding the preparation of Susan Rice for the Sunday talk shows, advising Rice to underscore the video and that the attack is “not a broader failure of policy.”

September 15, 2012: Obama blames the video.

September 16, 2012: Susan Rice appears on five Sunday talk shows and characterizes the attacks as a spontaneous reaction due to a video.

September 16, 2012: Libyan president disputes Rice’s comments, asserting Benghazi was a planned attack.

September 18, 2012: Obama appears on the David Letterman show, blames the video.

September 19, 2012: The head of the National Counterterrorism Center testifies that the attack was not a protest but a terrorist attack.

September 20, 2012: Obama blames the video.

September 20, 2012: Obama and Clinton run an ad on Pakistani TV apologizing for the video.

September 21, 2012: Clinton says it was a terrorist attack.

September 24, 2012: Obama appears on The View, blames the video.

October 4, 2012: Clinton establishes the Accountability Review Board (“ARB”) to examine the circumstances surrounding the loss of personnel in Benghazi. Clinton not interviewed by ARB.

October 11, 2012: At the vice-presidential debate, Joe Biden claims the administration was not informed about requests for more security at the consulate in Benghazi.

October 16, 2012: Obama, in a response to a question from a reporter about whether he denied requests for aid to Benghazi on September 11 responds, “The minute I found out this was going on, I gave three directives. Number one, make sure we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to. Number two, we are going to investigate exactly what happened and make sure it doesn’t happen again. Number three, find out who did this so that we can bring them to justice.”

October 18, 2012: Judicial Watch makes a Freedom of Information Act request to the administration for talking points and communications regarding the events in Benghazi. The administration ignores the request.

October 20, 2012: Obama claims that he was not aware of any requests for additional security in Benghazi.

January 23, 2013: Clinton asks, “What difference, at this point, does it make whether it was a terrorist attack or a spontaneous demonstration?”

June 21, 2013: Judicial Watch sues the administration for unlawfully withholding documents pertaining to Benghazi.

July 25, 2013: Obama slams the “endless parade of distractions, political posturing, and phony scandals.”

August 2013: The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform requests Benghazi e-mails. The Ben Rhodes e-mail is not among those produced.

April 18, 2014: Federal court orders the administration to turn over documents to Judicial Watch. 41 documents are released, including the Ben Rhodes e-mail.

May 1, 2014: Tommy Vietor tells Fox News the president was not in the Situation Room on September 11, 2012.

May 2, 2014: Speaker John Boehner announces a vote to form a select committee on Benghazi.

May 4, 2014: Representative Adam Schiff (D.., Calif.), member of the House Intelligence Committee, suggests Democrats boycott the House select committee as a “colossal waste of time.”

May 5, 2014: Carney will not say whether White House will cooperate with the select committee.

(Clearly, much remains to be filled in by the select committee. Numerous questions and lines of inquiry are prompted by the above. The chronology is based on congressional testimony and reports from, among others, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the Washington Times, the New York Times, the New York Post and Fox News, and the reporting of Steve Hayes and Jennifer Griffin.)

You're racist.
You are pushing a political agenda.

Which is it?

Or both?



Birthday boy.

She has got to be trolling here.





WTF?


:doh:

And the sad thing is, Mitt had pretty much every bit of this info. And he didn't bother to use it. He figured that he could play it safe and not appear "negative". He had the idea that Obama's utter trainwreck of a first term would be sufficient to unseat him.

It was like watching a sports team try to protect a lead. Painful.

Lets hope the next presidential candidate decides to play offense.

smackaholic wrote:Lets hope the next presidential candidate decides to play offense.

Not to worry.

Sincerely,

Moving Sale wrote:Murder as an answer to a political situation eh tard?

Sure. Why not?

"We came. We saw. He died."

Or is that solution only applied appropriately to browwwwwwn peeepul?

Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, right? Or are you just a hypocritical sack of racist shit?

WTF are you babbling on about now you stupid spamming cumstain?

It's pretty simple stuff here or are you really that stupid?

Alrighty then. Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence. How's that asshat?

Overruled. Your stupidity is very much in evidence.

Do you need someone to connect the dots for ya, lil buddy?

You can try and connect the dots to me, but you will fail you vapid racist scum.

One more swarthy disruption and I WILL clear this courtroom!

:x

The Honourable S.B. Yisreal, Chief Justice

Mr. Sale, please stand while the court is addressing you.




Oh...you are standing? Oooooops!

How is third grade treating you moose fucker?