H2O MAN
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 07:22 am
@revelette,

As expected, you have not been paying attention... there is definitely a cover-up.
I s "side show" the new "speed bump"?

Obama and his administration now have a few different
cover-ups occurring at the same. This is Obama tyranny.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -4  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 07:42 am
http://www.championnews.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/hillary-thenandnow.jpg
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 09:57 am
@H2O MAN,
The difference is a criminal break-in and subsequent cover up involved in the first instance, and negligence, oversight and its politicalization in the second instance.
H2O MAN
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 10:02 am
@InfraBlue,
Only if you ignore the facts and the 4 dead Americans.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 10:13 am
@H2O MAN,
The last guy to lose one of our ambassadors was Carter, and we all know what happened to him! If Obama was smarter he would take care in minimizing his failure here.
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 10:29 am
@hawkeye10,


Obama wants the dumbmasses to see him blaming republicans and FNC for the never ending
string of Obama administration failures. This tactic has worked quite well, but the press is
getting tired of being party to the big Obama lie, they are starting to report the truth instead
of what Obama tells them to report... this is a good sign that all is not yet lost.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 10:37 am
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:



Obama wants the dumbmasses to see him blaming republicans and FNC for the never ending
string of Obama administration failures. This tactic has worked quite well, but the press is
getting tired of being party to the big Obama lie, they are starting to report the truth instead
of what Obama tells them to report... this is a good sign that all is not yet lost.


I hate that you have been proven correct about Obama, this guy is a dick who does not value liberty and who believes that he is above the law.
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 10:41 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

H2O MAN wrote:



Obama wants the dumbmasses to see him blaming republicans and FNC for the never ending
string of Obama administration failures. This tactic has worked quite well, but the press is
getting tired of being party to the big Obama lie, they are starting to report the truth instead
of what Obama tells them to report... this is a good sign that all is not yet lost.


I hate that you have been proven correct about Obama, this guy is a dick who does not value liberty and who believes that he is above the law.


I sincerely wish I was wrong about the guy, but Obama really is kind of a dick.
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 01:12 pm
CNN exclusive: White House email contradicts Benghazi leaks

Quote:
CNN's Jake Tapper reports:

CNN has obtained an e-mail sent by a top aide to President Barack Obama about White House reaction to the deadly attack last September 11 on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, that apparently differs from how sources characterized it to two different media organizations.

The actual e-mail from then-Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes appears to show that whomever leaked it did so in a way that made it appear that the White House was primarily concerned with the State Department's desire to remove references and warnings about specific terrorist groups so as to not bring criticism to the department.

Rhodes, White House communications director Jennifer Palmieri, and White House press secretary Jay Carney, could not be reached for comment.

In the e-mail sent on Friday, September 14, 2012, at 9:34 p.m., obtained by CNN from a U.S. government source, Rhodes wrote:

“All –

“Sorry to be late to this discussion. We need to resolve this in a way that respects all of the relevant equities, particularly the investigation.

“There is a ton of wrong information getting out into the public domain from Congress and people who are not particularly informed. Insofar as we have firmed up assessments that don’t compromise intel or the investigation, we need to have the capability to correct the record, as there are significant policy and messaging ramifications that would flow from a hardened mis-impression.

“We can take this up tomorrow morning at deputies.”

You can read the e-mail HERE.

ABC News reported that Rhodes wrote: “We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation. We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting.” The Weekly Standard reported that Rhodes "responded to the group, explaining that Nuland had raised valid concerns and advising that the issues would be resolved at a meeting of the National Security Council’s Deputies Committee the following morning."

Whoever provided those quotes seemingly invented the notion that Rhodes wanted the concerns of the State Department specifically addressed. While Nuland, particularly, had expressed a desire to remove mentions of specific terrorist groups and CIA warnings about the increasingly dangerous assignment, Rhodes put no emphasis at all in his e-mail on the State Department's concerns.

The context of the e-mail chain is important. Different officials from different agencies were going through iterations of talking points for Congress. But Nuland, sources who have seen the e-mails say, was not the only one expressing concerns. There were internal disagreements within the CIA about a number of issues, including whether the attack was a pre-planned act of terrorism, or the result of spontaneous demonstrations in Benghazi because of demonstrations in Cairo against an anti-Muslim video (a demonstration that, it turns out, never happened in Benghazi). FBI officials were also expressing concerns about how much to say about the investigation, and how much information should be shared at that time.

Previous reporting also misquoted Rhodes as saying the group would work through the talking points at the deputies meeting on Saturday, September 15, when the talking points to Congress were finalized. While the previously written subject line of the e-mail mentions talking points, Rhodes only addresses misinformation in a general sense.

Context here, too, is important. The e-mail chain was generally about the talking points for members of Congress, and a government source says Rhodes in his e-mail was talking principally about the talking points for members of Congress, but he was also discussing other items more broadly including the investigation into the attacks, related intelligence, and what administration officials would say to reporters and the public. The deputies’ meeting the next day was to focus on more than just the talking points, sources tell CNN, looking primarily at security at U.S. diplomatic posts around the world. The "wrong information" being disseminated that Rhodes was addressing would need to be addressed with more than just talking points for members of Congress, but also by trying to forge a general understanding of what the Obama administration was saying about the attack at Benghazi. In this, it’s hard to conclude that the administration succeeded, given the various and conflicting explanations and continued references to demonstrations in Benghazi against an anti-Muslim video, a demonstration that the intelligence community now concludes did not happen.

So whoever leaked the inaccurate information earlier this month did so in a way that made it appear that the White House – specifically Rhodes – was more interested in the State Department’s concerns, and more focused on the talking points, than the e-mail actually stated.

The e-mail was sent to former National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor, CIA spokeswoman Cynthia Rapp, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, State Department official Jake Sullivan, spokesman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence Shawn Turner and others whose names have been redacted from the copy of the e-mail obtained by CNN. The subject line of the e-mail is “Re: Revised HPSCI Talking Points for Review.”
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 01:20 pm
@revelette,


Just wait until CNN finds out Obama had their reporters phones tapped as he did with AP's reporters...
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 02:18 pm
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
Just wait until CNN finds out Obama had their reporters phones tapped as he did with AP's reporters...


More bull crap
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 02:53 pm
@revelette,
revelette wrote:



More bull crap

compliments the Obama administration
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 May, 2013 07:39 am
When ABC News Claimed It Had "Obtained" The Benghazi Emails

Quote:
ABC News is now claiming that its Benghazi "exclusive" was based on summaries of emails between administration aides, not the emails themselves -- an assertion belied by their earlier reports.


(whole article with links at the source)

0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 May, 2013 09:25 am
@hawkeye10,
The last guy to lose an ambassador was Bush you dumb ****.
gungasnake
 
  0  
Reply Wed 15 May, 2013 09:36 am
The question which nobody is asking:


Did Bork Obunga and his puppet-master George Soros generate an immense reservoir of hatred against Americans in Libya in 2011 by taking down what amounted to the best government in the Islammic world for motives amounting to little if anything other than pure greed, and THEN set the stage for a US ambassador to be tortured, raped, and then killed by sheer fecklessness with no meaningful response in the picture even eight months later?


http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MD14Ak02.html


Ellen Brown noted (2011) that:



Quote:
Another anomaly involves the official justification for taking up arms against Libya. Supposedly it's about human rights violations, but the evidence is contradictory. According to an article on the Fox News website on February 28:

Quote:
As the United Nations works feverishly to condemn Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi for cracking down on protesters, the body's Human Rights Council is poised to adopt a report chock-full of praise for Libya's human rights record.

The review commends Libya for improving educational opportunities, for making human rights a "priority" and for bettering its "constitutional" framework. Several countries, including Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, and Saudi Arabia but also Canada, give Libya positive marks for the legal protections afforded to its citizens - who are now revolting against the regime and facing bloody reprisal.


Whatever might be said of Gaddafi's personal crimes, the Libyan people seem to be thriving. A delegation of medical professionals from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus wrote in an appeal to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin that after becoming acquainted with Libyan life, it was their view that in few nations did people live in such comfort:

Quote:
[Libyans] are entitled to free treatment, and their hospitals provide the best in the world of medical equipment. Education in Libya is free, capable young people have the opportunity to study abroad at government expense. When marrying, young couples receive 60,000 Libyan dinars (about 50,000 US dollars) of financial assistance. Non-interest state loans, and as practice shows, undated. Due to government subsidies the price of cars is much lower than in Europe, and they are affordable for every family. Gasoline and bread cost a penny, no taxes for those who are engaged in agriculture. The Libyan people are quiet and peaceful, are not inclined to drink, and are very religious.


They maintained that the international community had been misinformed about the struggle against the regime. "Tell us," they said, "who would not like such a regime?" .....



Khadaffi apparently was on the verge of pulling all of Africa out of the greedy webs of the international banking cartels (IMF, BIS etc.) and apparently Soros, the true ruler of today's demoKKKrat party, was not able to deal with that.

Another way to look at the picture which Ellen Brown and others have painted:

Is there any reason why a Libyan WOULDN'T want to torture and kill an ambassador of a nation which just took down a government like Khadaffi's and put Libya under the thumb of the muslim brotherhood??

Or, is there some reason why a government (ours) which had recently perpetrated something like that, would fail to take major precautions for protecting any of its own operatives still working in such a place?

Is there a reason not to impeach an incompetent US president who does all of this **** and then justs lets a US ambassador get tortured, raped, and killed and is off partying the next day like

Quote:
Who gives a ****??


and still hasn't done jack **** about it eight months later?
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  0  
Reply Wed 15 May, 2013 09:39 am
I mean, it sounds like Putin and Medvedev sent spies to Libya out of pure curiosity with orders more or less like:

Quote:
Guys, I don't need any state secrets or weapons secrets or any of the usual ****, I just want you to bum around the place for two or three weeks and get some idea of how the average person in Libya lives, and then report back here...


0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  0  
Reply Wed 15 May, 2013 11:42 am
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:

The last guy to lose an ambassador was Bush you dumb ****.


Where are the usual liberal fact checkers on this?
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 May, 2013 12:22 pm
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:
Where are the usual liberal fact checkers on this?

Their heads exploded after reading GungasnaKKKe's latest screed.
McGentrix
 
  0  
Reply Wed 15 May, 2013 12:46 pm
@joefromchicago,
joefromchicago wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
Where are the usual liberal fact checkers on this?

Their heads exploded after reading GungasnaKKKe's latest screed.


oh.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 May, 2013 01:20 pm
@joefromchicago,
Quote:
Their heads exploded after reading GungasnaKKKe's latest screed.


That (somebody with their head up their ass having their head explode) would have to hurt....
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Benghazi Boogaloo
  3. » Page 21
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 11/23/2024 at 12:18:35