May 8, 2013
"House Hearing on U.S. Consulate Attack in Benghazi, Libya."
"The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee conducts a hearing with Foreign Service officers focusing on information turned over to the committee by administration whistle-blowers on the Benghazi terrorist attacks." Live streaming here — on C-Span3, beginning in a few minutes.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
887 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 887 Newer› Newest»garage mahal said...
All one can really do is sit back and watch the spectacle of republicans falling all over themselves over Benghazi.
Right.
Because that is totally what is happening.
So informative you are.
MSM reporting that only the GOP seeks answers. Democrats not interested in truth at all at this point. (or ever)
It was the video!
Matt said...
What I don't get is WHY garage, machine, etc. spew the things they say.
Garage and phx find making other people angry amusing.
All one can really do is sit back and watch the spectacle of republicans falling all over themselves over Benghazi.
Well, I guess you've gone from "lying under oath is fine if it's about getting oral sex from an intern" to "lying about providing security to a US consulate is ok if it's done by a Democrat" in less than 2 decades.
But really, all along it's "whatever it takes to keep the Democrats in power."
BenedictineM said...Hysterical. Any lefty commenter dumb enough to comment on this thread will be given the run through the gauntlet
Given up on trying to sell the video dodge? Not even you could still push that given today's testimony.
I know some of you like garage but I have never understood why. This is the REAL garage. Party uber alles!
Oh please. If Benghazi happened under Bush or a Republican president you would be defending them and you know it.
That's what makes it funny to observe.
"I'm shocked and hurt someone in the government mislead us!"
LOL
"I'm shocked and hurt someone in the government mislead us!"
So it's common for this to occur. Just forget it? both sides do it, just forget it? Seems like a pretty effective way to enable even more corruption. Even when people do the right thing for the wrong reasons (and there certainly is some of that going on), that's not a reason to do the wrong thing.
The modern democrat party hits rock bottom.
garage mahal said...
All one can really do is sit back and watch the spectacle of republicans falling all over themselves over Benghazi.
Really? No bi-partisan concern for fixing a problem, even when voiced by some of the Democrats on the panel today?
You just do not have any idea of who lies to who in government and who lies to you.
Those guys sitting there today as witnesses were not lying. Believe what you must...
If Benghazi happened under Bush or a Republican president you would be defending them and you know it.
I wouldn't. I don't filter common decency through politics like you do. Stop the posing and own your glee over your masters dodging another bullet.
Marshal said...
Matt said...
What I don't get is WHY garage, machine, etc. spew the things they say.
Garage and phx find making other people angry amusing.
5/8/13, 4:38 PM
Well, they are failing then. I find it flabbergasting but it just makes me shake my head. I can't speak for all situations, but in this thread phx has been reasonable as far as I have seen.
garage,
All your statement shows is that you know nothing about me. I will never vote for a Democrat; however, in our last governor's election, our choices were Dayton (ugh!) and a Republican with two DUIs (ugh!). I picked the person with the most interesting name. I think they were in the Green Party.
I do not walk lock step with any party and I hate the lies and the cover ups. You should try it; it's good for the soul.
garage mahal said...
Oh please. If Benghazi happened under Bush or a Republican president you would be defending them and you know it.
You are a fucking liar and you know it. If you lave ever read anything I've ever said you'd know that was bullshit. I made it clear here today, for my part, it is NOT about party, it is about lying. I served under both parties, and both are fucking liars, just like you.
of all people, former Watergate Hearings staffer Hillary Clinton should know better than to participate in a coverup.
AprilApple said...
The modern democrat party hits rock bottom.
Keeps digging.
X said...
of all people, former Watergate Hearings staffer Hillary Clinton should know better than to participate in a coverup.
I dunno.
Wasn't she thrown off it for unethical behavior?
The garages of the world can ONLY think about party. As such, he cannot imagine anyone who does walk in lockstep with the party line. It makes sense; watch what happens to someone in the Democrat Party who strays off the path. Not in their personal behavior; just their political positions. Politics uber alles!
Now that Obama is for gay marriage, imagine a Democrat who were to vocally oppose it. Is their a Pro-Life Democrat of note?
"Oh please. If Benghazi happened under Bush or a Republican president you would be defending them and you know it. "
Nixon had to resign over covering up a stupid break in. No incredibly heroic men left to die just to cover his ass.
If a Benghazi level of corruption and lies ever does happen under a Republican, we will have people like you to thank. It's the new "Presidential". Nobody ever did as much to destroy the office as Obama. He got people killed to cover his own lame ass incompetence, and people like you just shrug, and smile, like snakes.
Oh please. If Benghazi happened under Bush or a Republican president you would be defending them and you know it.
here's what I know: if it's a coverup, a group of Republican senators might visit him and tell him he's done. it's happened before. we do know that Dem Senators would refuse to do the same to a Dem president. it's happened before.
Patrick said...
"I'm shocked and hurt someone in the government mislead us!"
So it's common for this to occur.
Don't let garage drag you off point, note what he wrote. He's pretending this is about being mislead instead of letting people die.
phx said...
I would like to say it's not going to damage me in the least one way or the other.
It is funny you would say that considering you said to me last week that Obama winning the election was a defeat for me personally.
There are a lot of weird and silly people on the Internet. And lefty dimwit phx is one of them.
Oh please. If Benghazi happened under Bush or a Republican president you would be defending them and you know it. "
In other words: the lies you tell yourself in order to rationalize your silly, dipshit political beliefs are endless.
phx said...
I would like to say it's not going to damage me in the least one way or the other.
Jay, phx was just demonstrating its usual reading comprehension with that remark. no one said it would damage phx.
Long term consequences may not entail the likelihood of a Hollywood style rescue or even "4 DEAD HEROES! 4 DEAD HEROES!! " being the takeaway. The Ambassador was dead within an hour of the attack, as was his assistant.
So it is technically about helping the last two fight, and there is no guarantee Americans would not have died with a bolstered firefight at the Benghazi Annex.
And a couple hundred or so grunts in Iraq and Afghanistan were killed when command under Bush and Obama determined rescue was just going to result in piles more dead and injured Americans, so those under fire were left to hold out until better support options were available. Not to mention lots more hundreds of
dead heroes sent out before they had any real armor or other protection - because it was politically important to pretend things were almost back to normal in 2003-04. And that deceit did result in dead and maimed Americans.
Benghazi is more important for the incompetence by Hillary et al before the attack,
And far more important in that the public was lied to and deceived to deny them their informed vote in a major election - about a major successful terrorist attack. With agencies, the media, and perhaps the President himself busy orchestrating the coverup and threatening those who could reveal it.
So 4 DEAD HEROES!! has to be put in context of
The sharks wanted blood, circling, circling and all they got today was chum. Ho hum.
c-span 3?!? i didn't even know such a thing existed. whose decision was to put this important hearing on a channel that nobody gets ?? my local news today, here in the san fran bay area, didn't even mention that there was a hearing in progress. this is why the 'garages' in this country are so glib and confident. if explosive charges are made but nobody reports on it, they don't exist. let's just get back to the riveting and important story of the chick who stabbed her boyfriend...
speak truth, democrats will destroy you like the mob.
Being mislead is one thing. But continuing to offer utter lies in the teeth of the known truth is galling. The demonstration lie and the video lie just sit there and the progressives sneer. There have been lots of coverups in the past forty years, but none that were so "fuck you" as these. They no longer bother to try to cover them up. They sit in the open. So what. What does it matter. Unbelievable. Cant think of another as blatant.
Matt said...I know some of you like garage but I have never understood why.
I guess because I think someone who loves Labradors and fishing has redeeming qualities. Mocking two dead heroes through a political prism goes a long way towards mitigating that opinion.
I think these revelations are also about Obama's sheer despicable fecklessness. The man went to bed while the attack was underway. He got up the next morning and jetted off to Las Vegas to raise campaign funds and in the next few days partied with Jay-Z and Beyonce - and it's now clear that he must have known all along, at minimum by the morning after the attack, that this was a terrorist attack on American "soil" (as it was our consulate), on the anniversary of September 11, resulting in the death of an ambassador and three other Americans.
It is sickening beyond words that he did not even bother to pretend that he cared -- and worse, our country then proved that it didn't care either by re-electing him.
The garages of the world can ONLY think about party. As such, he cannot imagine anyone who does walk in lockstep with the party line
Aren't you really telling me this is exactly what Republicans already do? Cuz that's what I think.
There are some Benghazi - Cleveland parallels here.
@ Cedarford
"Long term consequences may not entail the likelihood of a Hollywood style rescue or even "4 DEAD HEROES! 4 DEAD HEROES!! " being the takeaway. The Ambassador was dead within an hour of the attack, as was his assistant."
Now who can argue with that? I think we're all indebted to Cedarford for clearly stating what needed to be said. I'm particularly glad that these lovely children were here today to hear that speech. Not only was it authentic internet gibberish, it expressed a courage little seen in this day and age.
Barvo!
Yes folks. That was sarcasm. And a paraphrased quote from Blazing Saddles.
garage mahal said...
The garages of the world can ONLY think about party. As such, he cannot imagine anyone who does walk in lockstep with the party line
Aren't you really telling me this is exactly what Republicans already do? Cuz that's what I think.
5/8/13, 5:23 PM
Thus, proving my point. You think all Republicans do this because you cannot imagine someone not behaving just as you do. Thanks!
The fix is in. Google News, a major news aggregator as you doubtless know, shows no press coverage of Benghazi on its lead page other than a squib in small type connected to the Boston Globe. The lickspittles of the press have outdone themselves. How many times can this obvious collusion to protect this wretched administration be carried out without some sort of potentially uncontrollable push back from the citizenry?
So according Garage et al., the Obama administration will never be liable for anything as long as anyone dies under a Republican administration or anyone does anything wrong under a Republican administration or any Republican supporter ever defended the wrongdoing of a Republican administration.
So basically the Obama administration will never be liable for anything period.
So in other words Garage et al. have no moral standards or integrity whatsoever and won't even pretend they do.
It's all about power.
That's good to know.
Come on garage, surely you want to not leave men behind, and not have political calculation determine who tells the truth and who doesn't in matters as important as this.
You have it in you.
For the sake of our country, we're just going to uncover who's in charge, and what they've been up to. Politics is clearly involved, and a lot of anger channeled into politics, but it sems worthwhile to figure out which ideas are working and which aren't when it comes to a very messy and chaotic world, and how the men who died did so for some of the ideas of vital import to all of us.
So in other words Garage et al
No, not in other words. It's the hypocrisy that could choke a fucking horse. How many here defended this:
Question: "Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles?"
Rumsfeld: As you know, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.
--------------
Has anyone here looked into *any* details of the 4000+ deaths in Iraq, or the 30,000 wounded?
Of course not.
Garage and phx find making other people angry amusing.
If you get angry it's because someone "made" you angry. If I get angry it's because I'm a fool and it's my own damn fault.
Learn about personal responsibility.
Garage is forgetting the first rule when one finds oneself in a hole...
It is funny you would say that considering you said to me last week that Obama winning the election was a defeat for me personally.
That was just between us - you and me. And now you go blabbing it in front of everyone. I can't trust you for shit.
(Folks, I have no idea wtf he's talking about).
Fuck him, and all like him. Death is too good for pieces of shit like that.
Moby call.
Garage,
That was indeed awful and should have been rectified immediately. Additionally, I fully support balancing the budget AND dramatically increasing Defense spending to make sure this does not happen again. Do you agree? Which party has a reputation for slashing Defense spending?
Now, back on topic. Should the chips fall where they may regarding Benghazi? Do you support a full and thorough investigation? Do you support getting additional testimony from Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice?
"Has anyone here looked into *any* details of the 4000+ deaths in Iraq, or the 30,000 wounded?"
As Colonel Angus and others pointed out, earlier, 4,200 dead. Compare that wih 4 dead.
It's an inconvenient truth.
Has anyone here looked into *any* details of the 4000+ deaths in Iraq, or the 30,000 wounded?
garage: You are who you say you are, but that does not make us who you think we are.
Yes, I have looked into deaths and casualties of Iraq. That's another discussion.
What does that have to do with Benghazi? Again, do your complaints about Iraq excuse anything Obama does?
Do you not see that is a stance totally lacking integrity?
If Garage Mahal ends up dead, President Mom Jeans is Prime Suspect, Numero Uno.
Just sayin'. If you got something against the Garage, now's the time. Mom Jeans did it.
Do you support a full and thorough investigation?
Yes.
Ah, the Holy Trinity of leftist assholes are here.
Bitchtits Mahal, Ritalin-needing Retard, and Phx the Twat.
Even Inga has the decency to cut her losses on this one.
Have fun ignoring/obfuscating/dismissing the testimony of career state department employees with nothing to gain and everything to lose by coming forward.
So there you have it. No matter what the mistake, the embarrassment, the incompetence even now it's still Bush's fault, because Iraq. At least makeup a new lame ass excuse in year 5.
Dear ed - Those that say if only the military had flown in that 4 Dead Heroes!!! would have been saved are lying as bad as Hillary, and they know it.
The Ambassador was toast within half an hour of the initial attack, so too was his assistant. So the "martyr cry!" is only accurate about 2 killed at the CIA annex 8 hours later. And those that think that more troops engaging more enemy would magically have saved those two are also lying as bad as Hillary.
It could have meant lots more dead Americans - we don't know.
(I agree they should have been sent, even if it meant lots more US dead..just get disgusted with those claiming the 2 dead would have been SAVED!!)
The 4 were dead not from a Supersoldier Rescue Squad 3 hours away not sent, but because of really bad decisions by State in the months prior to the attack.
You can wave the bloody shirt, but the obvious counter is that Dems say 4 lost to Islamoids in Benghazi screwups is better than 40,000 casulaties in Iraq thanks to Bushie and Neocon screwups.
Their bloody shirt of Hero Martyrs from Iraq is a lot bigger and more blood-soaked than your Benghazi one.
What makes Benghazi bad was the incompetence prior to the attack that showed Dems had gotten few lessons learned from the 1998 Embassy attacks and 9/11. And worse, the lying and threats of the Administration and their media allies after the attack to conceal the truth from voters prior to an election. Worse than Watergate, IMO.
garage mahal said...
So in other words Garage et al
No, not in other words. It's the hypocrisy that could choke a fucking horse. How many here defended this:
Question: "Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles?"
Rumsfeld: As you know, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.
--------------
Has anyone here looked into *any* details of the 4000+ deaths in Iraq, or the 30,000 wounded?
Of course not.
Congress did, or should have before so many Democrats voted to start the campaign.
The Demos didn't care until they found something they could trump up for political advantage.
As I've proven in this post, along with documented rebuttals (as here) of the Demos' lies (and that's all they've got) of the "No WMDs" nonsense they tried to propagate, we know what happened in Iraq, much of which in terms of being short-handed ("you go to war with the army you have") can be laid at the feet of Willie Whitewater and the Peace Dividend crowd.
What we have in Benghazi is the murder by criminal negligence of 4 Americans by a Presidential Administration more concerned about its political fortunes than the lives of the men on the ground.
And I'll bet if we could go back, garage & Co would have been all exercised over the murder of one American, James Byrd, and would have jumped right in with the rest of the Lefty lynch mob, trying to stain George W Bush with it.
As I say, facts stink, don't they?
As Colonel Angus and others pointed out, earlier, 4,200 dead. Compare that wih 4 dead.
Well, hell, compare it to 50,000 dead in Vietnam or 6,000,000 in the Holocaust. Etc.
Your point?
It's apparently a novel concept, but everything does not boil down to totaling the number of dead and saying, "See!"
Bush's legacy. It is what it is.
If Benghazi happened under Bush or a Republican president you would be defending them and you know it.
How little you understand real human beings.
"Oh please. If Benghazi happened under Bush or a Republican president you would be defending them and you know it. "
I'm trying on the concept of a Republican president spending the weeks following a deadly attack on one of our Embassies telling everyone that it was something other than a premeditated attack and decrying free-speech in America.
It's just a little bit hard to do that sort of "if it was you" hypothetical when the hypothetical requires such an amazing departure from what is actually possible.
Aren't you really telling me this is exactly what Republicans already do? Cuz that's what I think.
Well, that's wrong. Tea Party wants conservatives in power, yet I'm fairly certain most are registered republicans.
And the Tea Party stopped George Bush's amnesty bid.
In general, leftists do not tolerate much dissent, in my estimation. Even leftists Scientists on the AGW thing don't tolerate dissent.
I thought the Democrats crafted themselves as the party of the unrepresented views, but in fact, it is quite intolerant of different views.
Who queefed? Ain't nobody got time for dat.
"Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles?"
This issue, and others like it have been studied extensively. Further, this issue, and others like it, aren't new. If you're interested, spend some time reading about US troops in World War II complaining about having to scavenge sandbags to up-armor their tanks. Then read about all the practical reasons why the tanks were built the way they were. Rumsfeld, for one, probably knows this, which is why he stated what he did.
We've spent a lot of time debating Iraq and its causes. I for one think not enough attention has been paid to the segment of the American population that abetted and encouraged the insurgency, but I think that's too far under the bridge at this point. With Benghazi, however, we don't even have all the facts of what happened on the table yet, so it's way too soon to say that 'nothing happened'.
And some homophobia too from Ritmo. Ah the classy, tolerant left.
Did I strike a nerve there? I was just using alliteration, but perhaps you are all butt hurt since you do actually require some prescription drugs?
Tsk tsk.
Although I encourage you to stay on your meds.
Cedarford,
I agree with your basic point (though don't know the timeline for Ambassador Stevens). The problem is the inaction.
Whether lives would have been saved, more lost, etc., to a large degree isn't that important.
As evidenced by one of the Republicans, it's not a good idea to tell people the US can't have a response deployed in under 20 hours. The inaction invites further attacks.
Operation Smear Benghazi Whistleblowers
is on.
Full investigation? Nah. Democrats are above the law, above questioning, above reproach and perhaps sick because they slipped and hit their head.
*sigh*
More deflections... anyway!
The intelligence and security situation leading up to 9/11 was something that both Clinton and Bush could have had influence over but not nearly the amount of control over as Obama had on Benghazi.
Benghazi is 100% at the feet of Obama as our presence and situation there was his doing. He chose regime change and the fact an American embassy was there was his doing. The lead up to Benghazi was Clinton's responsibility. As was testified to today, it was her decision to draw down the security in Libya despite the people there asking for more.
The response to the attack on Benghazi was something which the White House had 100% control over. They made the decisions that resulted in the abandonment of Americans under fire by Islamic terrorists.
The aftermath of Benghazi was 100% Obama's. It was his administration that decided to falsely blame a Youtube video. In testimony today, it was revealed that this was a significant setback to our relations with the new Libyan government and it impeded the investigation to the actual causes of the attack.
All three parts of the United States managing of Benghazi (before, during and after) were 100% on the Obama White House. There is no one else to blame. The lead up to September 11th, 2001 involved a lot of missed steps; however, to pin that on the Bush White House is total bullshit and you know that.
So, try being honest, showing a shred of intellectual honesty and demonstrate actual concern for your country before your party.
If I was a Democrat,( and I was for a long time) I would be embarrassed at the many freshmen Dem Congressfolks who read from the Obama-Clinton talking points like "hairdresser dummies" and "paper maiche Mephistopheles" puppet morons without a single original thought or question of their own.
Quotes are from Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" and they just fit what Mark Pocan (sadly my rep in the House) , Tammy Duckworth and all the other Dems did today at the House Oversight Committee hearing on Benghazi.
Truly embarrassing. I could NEVER support such hollow men and women.
Ritmo the Retard,
You aren't just stupid. You're a lowlife, worthless piece of shit.
You reveal that every time you post here.
You are one of the most worthless, vicious and depraved pieces of shit on the web.
You're headed for a very bad end.
"Oh please. If Benghazi happened under Bush or a Republican president you would be defending them and you know it.
Right.
Just like Harriet Miers and Dubai Ports.
Idiot.
phx said...
(Folks, I have no idea wtf he's talking about).
Of course you don't.
You don't actually believe any of the silly bullshit you say.
You're just flinging poo.
The attack itself could easily have happened during a Republican presidency... attacks have happened more than once. No one gets the level of infinite security they request and hindsight is always 20-20, turning ambiguous intel into a clarion call. The bad guys hate us.
Sure, there are a lot of 'why didn't you's' that would apply to any administration when something goes south.
But the Obama administration didn't even make a *show* of response and hasn't, far as I can tell, ever said why. Because what difference, at this point, does it make?
They lied to us, contradicted the president of Libya, and got a film maker locked up in prison so that from now until forever any claim we make that we *can't* punish the blasphemous will be known to be a lie.
But whatever difference, at this point, can it make?
It's okay Ritmo, don't fret. Lots of people struggling with coming to grips with their sexuality lash out and use homophobic insults in an attempt to suppress their true feelings.
You don't have to pretend anymore Ritmo, Collins has paved the way. Be proud of who you are.
Don't worry Ritmo, it gets better.
Oh, and in case people missed it, Ritmo tacitly admitted a few days ago that he is just trolling when he posts here.
garage mahal said...
Question: "Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles?"
Rumsfeld: As you know, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.
And the resident stupid shit takes to the Internet to pretend that:
1. Clinton didn't cut defense spending
2. You and your dipshit ilk don't support said cuts.
Don't worry you high school educated fuck-up, this means you made a fool of yourself yet again.
You always know when the nuts start posting death threats things are heating up, heh.
garage mahal said...
Has anyone here looked into *any* details of the 4000+ deaths in Iraq, or the 30,000 wounded?
Of course not.
Right. Because we need to "look into details" about soldiers dying in war.
It is super-duper complicated.
Idiot.
Ritmo the Retard, get some help.
Some religious education, a spiritual adviser, a psychotherapist.
You are so stupid and vile that you're headed toward self-destruction.
Change course while you've still got a chance.
Perstephanie said...
As Colonel Angus and others pointed out, earlier, 4,200 dead. Compare that wih 4 dead.
It's an inconvenient truth.
If the grand prize were $400,000,000 you couldn't explain, factually, how it is an "inconvenient truth"
Idiot.
Well, hell, compare it to 50,000 dead in Vietnam or 6,000,000 in the Holocaust. Etc.
Or compare it to the number of Marsh Arabs and Kurds killed after Gulf War I.
Or compare it to the number of Americans killed fighting the French in World War II.
Or compare it to the number of Americans killed by Wahabbi religious fundamentalists because we had troops in Saudi Arabia maintaining the blockade of Saddam...
More proof of my theory: modern Democrats are evil.
Screwtape is running the country. How else to explain the lack of integrity, the lies, the disloyalty, the anti-American slant, the chutzpah of ridiculous claims?
And, thread's over. Ritmo's here.
The bad end you are headed for is self-destruction,
Ritmo the Retard.
Your viciousness, stupidity and blind rage are leading you to crippling self-destruction.
Get help. Change course while you still have the opportunity to do so.
O Ritmo Segundo said...
It's almost as if he watched 3,000+ Americans die on home soil after getting memos that this would happen while reading children's books about goats.
Right.
That's totally what happened, idiot.
Bush got "memos' saying There will be an attack on 9-11
You never miss a chance to prove you're a simpleton.
garage mahal said...
Has anyone here looked into *any* details of the 4000+ deaths in Iraq, or the 30,000 wounded?
Of course not.
High school educated people (did you even graduate?) think this is an "analogy" to the Embassy attack in Libya.
That's funny, clown.
Ok, Ritmo I tried.
You're too stupid even to help.
Kid, you've got very serious problems. Quit trying to save the world and see if you can do something about saving yourself.
Now, I'm going to watch a ballgame.
High school educated people (did you even graduate?) think this is an "analogy" to the Embassy attack in Libya.
Yes Jay, ObamaghaziHitleryLIES was far far worse, wasn't it?
Certainly no lies were told in that little Iraq thingy was there? And if there were, we could count on you to be digging into that truth no doubt, because you're not a partisan hack at all.
Right. Because we need to "look into details" about soldiers dying in war.
The Washington Post routinely publishes the names, faces, and a brief description of the circumstances of all those that were killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, something that I think is both new and requires some thought. It's certainly not something that would have happened with any previous war; D-Day alone would require an entire special edition of the Post.
When the story surrounding Pat Tillman's death seemed too good to be true, people looked into it and the government (reluctantly) changed its story.
Criticizing congress, which has oversight duties, for wanting all the facts and for wanting to keep those facts in the open, seems shortsighted.
garage mahal said...
Certainly no lies were told in that little Iraq thingy was there?
Please name a single lie.
Thanks.
Please name a single lie.
That Iraq was a kite-flying paradise before the US invasion.
That the US was responsible for the hundreds of thousands of deaths that occurred under the sanctions regime imposed on Saddam Hussein.
Those sorts of lies?
Civilis said...
That Iraq was a kite-flying paradise before the US invasion.
Who said this?
That the US was responsible for the hundreds of thousands of deaths that occurred under the sanctions regime imposed on Saddam Hussein.
Who said this?
O Ritmo Segundo said...
This is a "modern" theory?
Nice reading comprehension.
Moron.
Ritmo wid da sick burn!
Please name a single lie.?
This is why no one takes you seriously. Or should anyway.
How did that "the war will pay for itself" work our for you big guy? We know you're super concerned with government borrowing money.
Civilis said...
That Iraq was a kite-flying paradise before the US invasion.
Who said this?
Michael Moore, I think.
That the US was responsible for the hundreds of thousands of deaths that occurred under the sanctions regime imposed on Saddam Hussein.
Who said this?
I heard that one from a lot of the Chomsky-esque 'US is the root of all evil' types during the Clinton administration. Often it would be associated with a line of BS about depleted Uranium ammo.
Like the rantings of our resident leftists, it's about throwing out enough emotions that you can influence perceptions. This form of debate means it doesn't matter that you can't cite any facts that the Bush administration knowingly lied about, but you can still make people believe they lied. Bush's reputation is based on not what he did or didn't do, but that a number of influential people hated him vehemently, when every single one of his sins could be just as easily laid at the feet of FDR during World War II.
garage mahal said...
This is why no one takes you seriously. Or should anyway.
In other words, you seem to be having trouble backing up your assertion.
Who, exactly, would be surprised by this development?
Civilis said...
Please name a single lie.
That the US was responsible for the hundreds of thousands of deaths that occurred under the sanctions regime imposed on Saddam Hussein.
Are we talking the nonsense floated by the Lancet?
If any of the Lefties want to try to fly that kite, it's going down like a B-17 over Schweinfurt.
PS Willie cut the military 40% across the board for his Peace Dividend. The big reason we had to call up the Weekend Warriors for Iraq and A-stan.
We went from an 18 division Regular Army to one with 10 divisions.
Same for the Navy
And hideously easy to verify.
PS Hijack the post all you want, Lefties.
You'll look just as stupid as if you'd stayed on subject.
(although this is one time I wish the proprietress would enforce adherence to the subject)
Today's hearing must've been very dissapointing to the right wingers. What was evident is that there is no there there. They can take comfort in the Sanford win yesterday, that's something, right?
Michael Moore, I think.
That's right!
a quick clip from "Fahrenheit 9/11" shows a few happy Iraqi woman and a boy flying a kite, shortly before the Invasion of Iraq
That is a good one, thanks for the reminder!
Angelica Dallas said...
Today's hearing must've been very dissapointing to the right wingers. What was evident is that there is no there there.
Let me guess, you didn't watch a minute of it, correct?
"Mission Accomplished!"
Angelica Dallas said...
Today's hearing must've been very dissapointing to the right wingers. What was evident is that there is no there there.
Really?
Hicks just told the panel that he was “effectively demoted” after challenging State’s leadership about its handling of Benghazi
A total nothing-burger!!!
“In a phone call after the interview I asked… [Acting Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs Beth Jones] her why the ambassador had said there was a demonstration when the embassy had reported that it was only an attack,” Hicks said. “She said I don’t know… The sense I got was that I needed to stop the line of questioning.”
I mean, what a let down, huh?
As little garagie shows, you idiots can't even grasp the cognitive dissonance by bleating on about "lies" from 10 years ago.
Conclusion: you're dumb.
Maybe Obama was just reading a little book about goats on the day of the attack.
Oh look, its memo girl!
I mean, what a horrible thing for a President to visit school children!
How awful of him!!
Lets have the Telepromter in Cheif come on TV and make the President tell us that the four dead in Benghazi and the whole bullshit story he told us about it is really nothing, because the Congress and the President before him went to war in Iraq, and couldn't pull it off with only four dead. If that's the best argument you have, then let him make your brilliant case to us, because I'd love to see that genius political thinking put to the test.
O Ritmo Segundo said...
If terrorists wanted to attack in the U.S., they could do the most damage by:
Says the idiot not a month after a terrorist attack in an America city while the Democrat she voted for is in office.
You can't parody you stupids anymore.
Colonel Angus,
For someone who prefixes their name with a military rank, you seem surprisingly uninformed on the issues surrounding GW2.
GW1 was never concluded, it ended with merely a cease-fire that required Iraq to do certain things. They were routinely violating those terms, and firing on US aircraft that were enforcing them. There was a serious of UN resolutions concerning this, too.
Surely you knew all this at one time; did it just slip your mind?
Aridog,
"You just flunked the test of giving a shit regardless of party."
With all due respect, there's a serious error of omission in your statement: to wit, the word "again".
O Ritmo Segundo said...
The nicest part was, he waited eight minutes thinking about goats before deciding to get up and do anything else.
Notice the incoherence here.
Bush was a dummy who should have never been in charge, yet he should have took charge.
Bush was a "shoot from the hip cowboy" yet staying calm in a crisis is bad.
Don't worry ritty, you're fucking dumb so you probably don't get your incoherence.
Which is why I'm happily explaining it to you.
If only Bush would have ordered the air force to start shooting down planes in that missing 8 minutes, ritty and her silly ilk would be praising him today!!
Gee, notice how the whole "Bush waited 8 minutes" crowd can't bother to ask themselves what Obama was doing the day of the Benghazi attack.
Huh, go figure.
A sure sign that this President has screwed the pooch is when his defenders start talking about any crazy shit from the last decade that they can remember as maybe something bad that Obama probably wasn't part of, because you have to back that far to find such a thing.
If only that reckless cowboy would have jumped up in that room full of 1st graders and shouted "We're going to blow up some rag heads!" ritty and her dipshit fellow travelers would be singing the praises today!
O Ritmo Segundo said...
Well, not that anyone's counting, but I think that once someone's in office, taking notice of a "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in U.S." memo would have been an important step and should count for something
Hilarious.
That's right stupid shit, nobody noticed it!!
Which is why it was like, in the news and stuff.
Again, you're fucking dumb.
See what I said about emotional nonsense persuasion tactics?
Bush was on a PR stop at a school when the 9/11 attacks happened. He was reading a book called 'My Pet Goat' to the children. When he was informed of the attack, he kept reading while his security detail prepared to evacuate him so the children wouldn't be unduly alarmed.
There's no argument there, nor anything to debate. It's trivia, and one that doesn't make Bush look bad. But repeating the name of the book enough makes people believe it's a bad thing.
Where's Robert Cook? I want a debate, and even when I disagree with him (which is almost always) at least he'll actually make an argument.
In other words, you seem to be having trouble backing up your assertion.
You don't care about lies. You're a rabid partisan hack who will still defend the Iraq debacle that killed 4400 people and wounded 30,000-40,000 more. And cost trillions of dollars.
To this day, when the shit hits the fan, Obama goes back to his copy of My Pet Goat and tries to find wisdom he's sure must be in there. On Benghazi night, he thought he better read a whole chapter for this one, and that's where he was all those hours. In chapter 1 the goat runs away and hides.
taking notice of a "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in U.S." memo
Aw, ignorant wittle ritty doesn't know that the same intelligence was given to Clinton.
How cute.
The 1998 document is "the most important PDB about hijacking published before 9/11," Zelikow said. The Aug. 6, 2001, PDB prepared for President Bush mentioned 1998 intelligence concerning a plot by bin Laden "to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of 'Blind Sheik' Omar Abdel Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists."
The 2001 PDB said intelligence officials "have not been able to corroborate" the plot reports from 1998.
Why it is almost as if ritty is an ignorant asshole or something.
garage mahal said...
You don't care about lies
You can't name any lies.
Dumbass.
And cost trillions of dollars.
Hilarious.
Yes, the entire 11 year costs of the GWOT have cost less than a single year of Social Security & Medicare (Federal spending for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid stood at $1.6 trillion in 2012)
Garagie stupid.
Angelica Dallas said...
Today's hearing must've been very dissapointing to the right wingers. What was evident is that there is no there there. They can take comfort in the Sanford win yesterday, that's something, right?
The She Devil of the SS, or is it leslyn?, is back with her latest sockpuppet.
Lessee, we had Peonia, then Pollywog.
Can't wait for the next...
machine said...
"Mission Accomplished!"
That's what the Choom Gang said when they thought they had this buried.
The only thing dumber would be some phony folksy to show up with his, "Sedition! treason! Alinsky!".
O Ritmo Segundo said...
Just the way Republicans like their cover-ups.
Why it is almost as if Ritty doesn't understand Bush was not President in 1998 when the intelligence for the PDB was put together and delivered to the White House.
Ritty = ignorant asshole.
ritmo: "Was Clinton the one who let it happen?"
LOL
Sooooo, you're one of those "Bush LIHOP" kind of folks.
That music you hear in the background? Twilight zone.
You don't care about lies. You're a rabid partisan hack who will still defend the Iraq debacle that killed 4400 people and wounded 30,000-40,000 more. And cost trillions of dollars.
How many lives did the German/Italian/French debacle cost the US in the second world war? How much money?
Garage, more importantly, and useful as an actual debate question, is there a difference, and, if so what is the difference and why? Step up and make a coherent argument! Why is Iraq any less a sideshow than Europe in World War II?
Garagie all worried about federal spending now!
in fiscal year 2012:
22% of the budget - $773 billion was spent on Social Security
21% the budget - $732 billion was spent on Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
12% the federal budget - $411 billion, was spent on programs that provide aid to individuals and families facing hardship.
a trillion!!!!!!
O Ritmo Segundo said...
Was Clinton the one who let it happen?
Yes!!
Because now "letting it happen" = not listening to uncorroborated 4 year old intelligence!!!
Idiot.
ritmo: "Jay = Nothing but hatred, blind partisanship, and an inability to make any Republican accountable for anything."
Can you name a single thing you hold Obama accountable for?
The 1998 document is "the most important PDB about hijacking published before 9/11," Zelikow said
Ritty says, nuh-uh wingnutz!!!!!
A pinhead asks (of 9/11)" "Was Clinton the one who let it happen?"
Everyone else here remembers that the plot to destroy the WTC had been in the works for years before Bush was elected, much less inaugurated, and that Clinton had passed on at least one opportunity to get rid of bin Laden, so the answer to the disingenuous question is "yes, he was one of the ones who let it happen".
"Was this written in English?"
There is no time limit. Take all you need little fella.
ritty takes to the Internet to claim that crashing airlines into WTC = "hijacking"
Ritty, fucking dumb.
Is Bush President again? It's like he never left.
It is funny to watch ritty and her ilk screech that "Bush got a memo!!!"
As if it means anything.
They can't name as single thing Bush would have done in response to the mem they would have supported so ritty just keep screeching "Bush got a memo!!!"
Conclusion: ritty dumb
"Well, not that anyone's counting, but I think that once someone's in office, taking notice of a "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in U.S." memo would have been an important step and should count for something. Perhaps you disagree, though. "
I've heard this crap for more than 10 years now, from a bunch of liberals. I always reply with a question that shuts them up.
Ritmo, if you, with all the knowledge you have now about the 9/11/2001 Attack on US, suddenly find out that you are an American president in August 2001, what would you do to stop al Qaeda and Osama Ben from successful attack on America?
Fitzmas?
I remember it being one of those situations where Democrats wanted a conservative frogmarched out because they cared more about vengeance for losing a policy battle than about facts. By was it Gov Walker's indictment, or another one?
Yea, but George Washington owned slaves, and Jackson was hard on the injuns, so...
Was Clinton the one who let it happen?
The entirety of the 9-11 attack was planned while Clinton was in office.
All but 2 of the hijackers came to America while Clinton was in office.
This all happened after Clinton received "the most important PDB about hijacking published before 9/11"
So yeah, Clinton did let it happen.
Which is why you dipshits went absolutely wild when "The path to 9-11" aired on television.
For garage:
Did you know we lost over a thousand men simply rehearsing for the Normandy landing during WWII?
Did you know that even with a full 3 years to plan, that allied armor was utterly unprepared for the hedgerow country encountered in the low countries? It took the ingenuity of the men themselves to fashion metal flanges/plates/teeth etc to cut through the most obvious and inexplicably missed obstacles.
The very same people who hold GWBush accountable for every butterfly that lands incorrectly in the forest are simultaneously lecturing us in how Obama isn't really responsible for anything that happens.
4 dead because the POTUS skipped vital intelligence briefings and then when the attack happened he had to go toned to get up early to do a fundraiser?
No problem to garage mahal.
But had Obama used a single secret router, garage mahal would be all over it!
No, wait, he would ignore anything bad/evil/criminal a Democrat does. I mistakenly projected my integrity onto a liberal there for a second.
all one month after receiving the memo on what Enemy Numero Uno for the last several years was up to?
Notice how the dipshit simply can not let this go.
It is an emotional attachment for her.
And then I saw, not only how his party handled the melt-down of our financial markets eight years later
Hysterical.
Why it is almost as if you pretending Democrats didn't control congress at the time.
You're a complete and total fucking moron.
early ritmo: "Was Clinton the one who let it happen?"
Later ritmo: "You see, Bush I gave the benefit of the doubt to."
LOL
Do you even try to keep track of your incoherent lies?
"First off, I'd ask for the intelligence necessary to stop it."
You should ask for some now, any amount really.
O Ritmo Segundo said...
First off, I'd ask for the intelligence necessary to stop it
HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA
The never served in the military, doesn't own a firearm, never handled a firearm, idiot has such a firm grasp of reality here
First off, I'd ask for the intelligence necessary to stop it.
I love how this is supposed to be some serious response, ass clown.
You can't name a single thing Bush should have done in response to the 1998 PBD.
You stupid fuck.
ritmo: "All I want is consistency from these Republican bastards"
LOL
bastard heal thyself.
all one month after receiving the memo on what Enemy Numero Uno for the last several years was up to?
Please point to the section of the memo that says this, retard.
Go right ahead.
What is it about Benghazi that makes leftists runaway and hide from even discussing it. Guilt, fear, embarrassment? Surely these are comfortable feelings by now.
O Ritmo Segundo said...
It's called keeping up with new information, and changing one's mind accordingly.
You mean like it being shown to you that the 2001 PDB was not significant and you blaming Bush for "letting it happen" keeping up, right?
When president ritty is in charge and given a memo with 3+ year old intelligence on possible hijackings she will "ask for the intelligence to stop it!"
With the complete & total understanding that "intelligence" is always current, real time, and like on your desk the very next day!
Why it is almost as if ritty is a silly, stupid, fuck or something.
"In an appearance on ABC's "The View" this morning, just-departed secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she regretted that faulty intelligence had reported that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but had no regrets that U.S. troops toppled dictator Saddam Hussein from power.
Rice, taking pride in the administration's relief aid for Africa, conceded that Katrina was "for my mind, one of the greatest disasters for the administration and for the country.""
O Ritmo Segundo said...
I think it was in the title, retard.
So the "title" said the attack will be on 9/11?
Or was the title part where it was revealed that hijacking planes isn't the same as crashing them into buildings?
Early ritmo: "Was Clinton the one who let it happen?
5/8/13, 7:04 PM
Later ritmo: "You see, Bush I gave the benefit of the doubt to.
5/8/13, 7:13 PM
Even Later ritmo: "It's called keeping up with new information, and changing one's mind accordingly."
5/8/13, 7:19 PM
LOL
Hey ritmo, what "new information" did you "keep up with" between 7:04pm and 7:13pm this evening that led you to go from Bush Let It Happen to I gave Bush the benefit of the doubt?
LOL
Too funny.
Coherence. You don't do it so well.
bagoh20 said...
What is it about Benghazi that makes leftists runaway and hide from even discussing it. Guilt, fear, embarrassment?
The realization their Messiah will not rise the first Sunday after his crucifixion.
What is it about Iraq that makes rightists runaway and hide from even discussing it. Guilt, fear, embarrassment? Surely these are comfortable feelings by now.
Ritmo, leave the humor to us idiots. It's obviously above your pay grade. Stick to being unintentionally hilarious.
Ed: "What is it about Iraq that makes rightists runaway and hide from even discussing it."
What would you like to discuss?
What is even funnier about ritty screeching about the memo is that it says in the Washington Post:
The 1998 PDB is titled: "Bin Laden preparing to hijack U.S. aircraft and other attacks."
I love fact that ritty thinks a sane response to a 1998 memo is to "ask for intelligence" without seeing the irony.
You're really fucking dumb, ritty
Mr. Ed said...
What is it about Iraq that makes rightists runaway and hide from even discussing it
There have been about 50 posts from "the right" on Iraq here.
You need to try harder.
ritmo: "Are you pissed that I changed my mind for the worse on Bush's (and Republicans') general competence over several years?"
LOL
No.
I'm just amazed that your change of mind occurred within a 9 minute period of time this evening!!
LOL
"What is it about Iraq that makes rightists runaway and hide from even discussing it."
When did you escape from those three dudes in the house? A whole lot has happened while you were gone.
So in response to a memo that says:
t said intelligence reports "suggest Bin Laden and his allies are preparing for attacks in the U.S., including an aircraft hijacking to obtain the release of Shaykh Umar Abd al-Rahman, Ramzi Yousef and Muhammad Sadiq Awda. One source quoted a senior member of Gama at al-Islamiyya (I.G.) saying that as of late October the group had completed planning for an operation in the United States on behalf of bin Laden but that the operation was on hold. A senior bin Laden operative from Saudi Arabia was to visit I.G. counterparts in the United States soon thereafter to discuss options -- perhaps including an aircraft hijacking."
Ritty is going to "ask for intelligence" to stop the hijacking hijacking to obtain the release of Shaykh Umar Abd al-Rahman, Ramzi Yousef and Muhammad Sadiq Awda, which would do nothing to stop 9-11.
Ritty, dumb
O Ritmo Segundo said...
Jay wouldn't ask for intelligence because he already presumes to know everything that every president already knows.
says the peson who claims Bush was told about the 9-11 attacks in advance.
As drago is demonstrating, you can't keep up with your own bullshit.
ritmo: "Jay wouldn't ask for intelligence because he already presumes to know everything that every president already knows."
LOL
ritmo in all her glorious ignorance really doesn't get the irony of asking the intelligence services for intel during the presentation of the best intelligence that was available at that moment!
I thought that Jay was just giving ritmo an exceptionally hard time, but then ritmo has to pipe up and betray her astonishing ignorance and lack of basic reasoning skills.
I'll bet you were educated in temporary buildings.
That won't impress garage I'm afraid.
Run away brave Robin!
ritmo: "You are a fucking retard. My mind changed over several years."
LOL
You just demonstrated your mind changing powers this evening. On this thread. Which I have helpfully reproduced for you.
LOL
Given how embarrassing that must be for you, I don't really blame you for tripling down on stupid.
LOL
ritmo in all her glorious ignorance really doesn't get the irony of asking the intelligence services for intel during the presentation of the best intelligence that was available at that moment!
Of course she doesn't.
She seems to think the 1998 memo said the attack was going to happen on 9/11/01.
Ritty is like, really, really stupid.
HA: Ritmo, if you, with all the knowledge you have now about the 9/11/2001 Attack on US, suddenly find out that you are an American president in August 2001, what would you do to stop al Qaeda and Osama Ben from successful attack on America?
Ritmo: First off, I'd ask for the intelligence necessary to stop it. I probably wouldn't fly the bin Ladens out of the country immediately afterward.
I othe towards, after all the swearing and cursing, ritmo could not propose a single thing that he could have done if he were the president of the USA in August 2001, with all today's knowledge of how al Qaeda attacked America - that would have stopped that attack. Not a single damn thing. With all the knowledge he has today, which is vastly superior to what president bush had in 2001.
And this is why ritmo and all liberals who blame bush are stupid. Undeniably.
Garage, Ritmo etc. are resorting, as they usually do, to the Tu Quoque Fallacy:
Tu quoque or the appeal to hypocrisy, is a logical fallacy that attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position; it attempts to show that a criticism or objection applies equally to the person making it. This dismisses someone's point of view based on criticism of the person's inconsistency, and not the position presented,[2] whereas a person's inconsistency should not discredit their position. Thus, it is a form of the ad hominem argument.[3] To clarify, although the person being attacked might indeed be acting inconsistently or hypocritically, this does not invalidate their argument.
Even if their complaints about Bush were equivalent, it still comes down to what their mothers apparently did not teach them: Two wrongs don't make a right.
That being the case, it's pointless to argue. If they could defend Obama on Benghazi, they would, but they can't. So they attempt to raise as much heat and smoke as possible and they don't care how they do it.
Their position is neither moral nor honest.
Ritty also thinks it was "the Republicans" who 'responded" to the financial meltdown.
That would be news to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.
ritmo: "You are a blind partisan shill and I have no problem entertaining the necessary scenarios for showcasing that."
LOL
Feel free to begin doing that at any time.
Really.
Or do you have a problem with changing your mind in mid-stream which keeps you from fulfilling your claims?
LOL
"I know, brave kkkonservatives"
Ritmo, please pay attention to what I'm about to 'say':
Fuck you. Really. Fuck you. That's just offensive and beneath you.
creeley23: "Garage, Ritmo etc. are resorting, as they usually do, to the Tu Quoque Fallacy:"
Uh, creeley, we all assured garage there would be no latin on the thread tonight.
He has enough problems with geography and nationalities.
O Ritmo Segundo said...
What's a hijacking hijacking? Is it like diverting a hijacking to normalize a situation to what it was before the hijacking occurred?
Ritty is now reduced to saying that a hijacking to obtain the release of 3 terrorists from federal prison is the same as flying 4 planes into building (1 unsuccessfully)
Again, ritty is really, really fucking dumb.
Post a Comment