8
   

Real Benghazi Scandal

 
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  4  
Reply Thu 6 Mar, 2014 07:24 am
http://assets.amuniversal.com/4d7dac3086f801310581005056a9545d.jpg
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Sun 9 Mar, 2014 08:34 pm
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/t1/14510_668516866538354_1986531827_n.jpg
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Mar, 2014 02:16 pm
https://scontent-b-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/q71/995297_10151914822871275_1107181790_n.jpg
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  0  
Reply Mon 10 Mar, 2014 07:16 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:

I'm curious if you have read the cable that was in response to.

Claims made by an opinion piece in the WSJ about a who signed a response turning down more protection in Benghazi that was from a cable that isn't mentioned at all are about 4th hand when it comes to reality.

The cable that was in response to asks for more security forces for Tripoli and asks for "continued support" for the agents in Benghazi. It requests the continued teams through the run up to the June elections. This is April, elections are in June, the attack happens in September. But WTF. Why don't you just rely on an opinion piece in the WSJ for your facts since that gives you the answers you want.

I said that the diplomats asked for help and didn't get it. You said that statement was indicative of my fantasy life. I have provided a link (although apparently now requiring a log-in that it didn't when I quoted it) to a respectable newspaper which states that it's true. Either I was right, or at the least, it isn't surprising that I believed it since I can cite an online newspaper which states outright that it's true. Either way, it isn't indicative of being out of touch with reality.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Mar, 2014 07:26 pm
@Brandon9000,
Brandon: Either way, it isn't indicative of being out of touch with reality.

///////////////

That's a real hoot, Brandon. Y'all are way out of touch with reality.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Mar, 2014 09:22 pm
@Brandon9000,
Several little problem with your thinking there Brandon. First of all it was not an article in a respectable newspaper. It was an opinion piece in their online section written by someone who isn't a journalist. Ron Johnson is a GOP congressman from Wisconsin.

You are out of touch with reality. I wouldn't trust what a politician on either side of the aisle says without confirming from other sources.

Quote:
I said that the diplomats asked for help and didn't get it.
And the State department asked for more money for security from Congress and didn't get it. It makes as much sense to blame the GOP based on that request as it does to lay blame based on the request for more security in Tripoli. What was actually asked for is nothing like what the opinion piece states.
glitterbag
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Mar, 2014 09:39 pm
As far as I'm concerned, the real scandal is that so few of our citizens ever wonder about all the civilian employees working on behalf of the American public who volunteer to serve American interests and put themselves in harms way, every day and they are acutely aware that situations shift rapidly, and we sign agreements acknowledging we understand the risk. No one want to die in a terrorist attact, we all want to come home safe and sound. But the sheer honest answer is, we don't travel with a massive security team, anything can happen.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 10 Mar, 2014 09:44 pm
@glitterbag,
No, gb, the real scandal is that so many of these folks are engaged in terrorist actions against other countries. The USA is in a constant terrorist mode.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  0  
Reply Tue 11 Mar, 2014 04:03 am
@parados,
parados wrote:

Several little problem with your thinking there Brandon. First of all it was not an article in a respectable newspaper. It was an opinion piece in their online section written by someone who isn't a journalist. Ron Johnson is a GOP congressman from Wisconsin.

You are out of touch with reality. I wouldn't trust what a politician on either side of the aisle says without confirming from other sources.

Quote:
I said that the diplomats asked for help and didn't get it.
And the State department asked for more money for security from Congress and didn't get it. It makes as much sense to blame the GOP based on that request as it does to lay blame based on the request for more security in Tripoli. What was actually asked for is nothing like what the opinion piece states.

Many people, in fact, ask for help and don't get it all over the world every day. Your assertion, however, was that the diplomats didn't ask for help and that such a belief was even fantastical. I've shown that either it's the literal truth, or, at the least, commonly believed, either of which demonstrates that it isn't a wild fantasy. You have been shown to be wrong and now merely lack the intellectual honesty to stop talking.
edgarblythe
 
  4  
Reply Tue 11 Mar, 2014 06:22 am
I would think the Benghazi-for-political-leverage crowd would eventually have enough respect for the dead to turn their efforts at constructive ideas, rather than beating dead horses all the way through 2016.
parados
 
  3  
Reply Tue 11 Mar, 2014 06:54 am
@Brandon9000,
Quote:
Your assertion, however, was that the diplomats didn't ask for help and that such a belief was even fantastical.

My assertion was that they didn't ask for more help in Benghazi. Tripoli asked for help. It is a fantasy to believe that is the same as Benghazi.

I also linked the actual request sent by the Tripoli diplomats that you are claiming asked for help in Benghazi. Now you are arguing your own beliefs instead of the facts it seems.
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2014 04:46 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

I would think the Benghazi-for-political-leverage crowd would eventually have enough respect for the dead to turn their efforts at constructive ideas, rather than beating dead horses all the way through 2016.


Laughing Laughing

Didn't you see this post?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2014 05:56 pm
@edgarblythe,
Really?

So justice for the Benghazi dead should play second fiddle to "social justice?"

This is simply another version of Hilary's "What difference does it make?!"

By this logic, all the folks who expressed their outrage over Treyvon Martin's death would have had more respect for the deceased young man if they directed their energy towards something "constructive."

JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2014 06:04 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn: So justice for the Benghazi dead should play second fiddle to "social justice?"

Justice was served, American style, Finn. You send terrorists in, they get blown away - American style.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2014 06:07 pm
@glitterbag,
glitterbag wrote:

As far as I'm concerned, the real scandal is that so few of our citizens ever wonder about all the civilian employees working on behalf of the American public who volunteer to serve American interests and put themselves in harms way, every day and they are acutely aware that situations shift rapidly, and we sign agreements acknowledging we understand the risk. No one want to die in a terrorist attact, we all want to come home safe and sound. But the sheer honest answer is, we don't travel with a massive security team, anything can happen.


This is the very reason these civilian employees who put themselves in Harm's Way, have to rely on their bosses to protect their lives. When one of them is killed, it hardly reflects on the degree of care displayed by American citizens, it is entirely the responsibility of the people who head up the governmental agency in which they have entrusted their well-being.

The real scandal is that the people who died in Benghazi put their lives in the hands of people who cared more about politics than their continued existence.

"...we sign agreements acknowledging we understand the risk."

Wow, you're a member of an American embassy posted to a hazardous region? Who knew?

Or do you have to sign the same agreement when you’re only risk as a government bureaucrat is a mean paper cut?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2014 06:08 pm
@JTT,
And the US Ambassador to Libya was a "terrorist."

Sure JTT.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2014 06:23 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn, he worked for the largest terrorist group on the planet, the government of the USA, so that he was a terrorist is a given.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2014 06:25 pm
@JTT,
How can someone intelligent be so stupid?
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2014 06:38 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Who says he was intelligent, Finn. There are all manner of idiots who work for various US governments. Hell look at the idiots you've had as prezes, Reagan and GWB for example.

Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2014 06:45 pm
@JTT,
I "said" you are intelligent.

You are making me rethink the comment.
 

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
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/24/2024 at 10:31:47