Page 7 of 16 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 151

Thread: White House holds OFF-THE-RECORD briefing with reporters on Benghazi

  1. #61
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    18,266

    Re: White House holds OFF-THE-RECORD briefing with reporters on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    Good morning, humbolt.

    Excellent! You speak for so many of us that just want the truth. One wonders what the attitude would be if those who are attempting to trivialize this were in the same position as those we turned our backs on when they were pleading for assistance that never arrived. I can't imagine the final thoughts of those who died. Did they wonder WHY? What goes around comes around, and if you want to call it justice, or karma, or something else, it will be repaid in kind at some point. It always is. ...sad...
    Good morning, Pol, and happy Mothers Day. The "why" is looking more and more like it was completely political. A presidential election may cost a lot in dollars and cents, but it shouldn't include the lives of innocent people, whether it's a president Romney or a president Obama. I don't think enough of either one of them to justify that.

  2. #62
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,985

    Re: White House holds OFF-THE-RECORD briefing with reporters on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Did you figure out that part of the Meeting being with only certain media sources?
    Did you bother to read my post?
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtpoorchris View Post
    That's a pretty shoddy deflect to the simple comparison I'm trying to make.
    No, it's an entirely appropriate response to the nonsense flying wildly in this thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by humbolt View Post
    If you believe that the meeting which didn't happen is innocuous, great.
    If you really believe the White House publicly called a conspiratorial meeting in plain sight, then I would suggest you re-evaluate just how much you dislike Democrats/Obama.

    Your argument stems from your hope that some systemic failure can be blamed for the attack in Benghazi.
    It already has been. Have you not been paying attention to the world? Have you been so caught up in conspiracy theories you've missed the truth?

    People in responsible positions made the decisions which resulted in the attack, and people made the subsequent attempt to hide those decisions - thereby attempting to avoid any culpability. The first step in correcting this is to identify the people who made the decisions, and remove them from positions which require sound judgement and the authority to make decisions involving the well-being of our personel serving abroad.
    Does that include all the House Republican Congress people who voted to decrease the money given for the defense? Does that include the current Republican Senators who still are not asking about current defense in other places?

    What happened was tragic, everyone knows this. But what happened was the result of poor preparation, nothing else. Once the attack started, nothing could have saved Stevens and Smith, and it would have been a miracle if Woods and Doherty were still alive. The failure lied in the appropriate preparations for security, that's all. And most likely, the decisions which were made were made to not bolster security were made for legitimate reasons. I find it very hard to believe any American wanted other Americans to die.

    Let's quit trying to find someone to fire, especially since Clinton, Patraeus and Panetta are not even in their positions anymore. Let's instead focus our efforts on making sure we minimize the risk of this happening again.

    As Americans, we don't leave our ambassadors and security twisting in the wind with no recourse but death.
    But you are! You're so worried about four people who died months ago you're not paying the slightest bit of attention to those who are still in danger! Your statement here is completely false!

    We don't let the attackers walk away with no consequence for their acts.
    What? Who has done that?

    That some are resorting to endless contortions
    And doing so purely for political gain...I mean, we're to the point where Republicans are whining about e-mails in the immediate aftermath of the attack. It's pathetic people are still listening to anything they say.

    This event in Benghazi is not one of those. The truth is important here
    You're right, the truth is important. Here's the truth.

    1) There were breakdowns in preparation for the Benghazi residence.
    2) Those breakdowns have been identified, and according to Clinton during her testimony in January, are being resolved.
    3) Once the attack started, NOTHING could have saved Stevens or Smith
    4) Only by the most idealistic scenarios, which many times push reality to the absolute brink, could anything have been done to save Woods and Doherty.
    5) The fact is what happened in Benghazi was tragic and avoidable beforehand, but impossible to save once the attack has started.
    6) So we need to spend more time making sure our preparation in other locations prevents attacks, not whining endlessly about e-mails and nearly impossible scenarios.

    While I'm on my soapbox here, I should also mention that the decision not to send help, whether it arrived in time to save lives or not, is one of the most coldly calculating and cruel decisions I can imagine. I can't speak for others, but I know that if I had been on that rooftop in Benghazi fighting for my life and that of others, I would've welcomed the knowledge that help was on the way, that there would be some consequence for the attack in which justice played a role. We didn't even give them that. Not even that, Sly. That's beyond despicable.
    I just read this article this morning. Perhaps your distaste will subside once you read a common sense account of what happened:

    Benghazi (II): A military analysis of the Fox mystery man's fantasy rescue plan | The Best Defense

    Once you realize that, perhaps you'll realize that endangering more American lives, just for someone to welcome the news, is not only not cold and cruel, but sensitive to the fact risking more American lives which likely would not have saved any in the first place is not only bad policy, it just does not make sense.


    EDIT: By the way, help WAS sent. A CIA team from the annex came to the consulate, along with members of Libya's security forces and they removed Smith's body. The team from Tripoli arrived to the annex at about 1:30 a.m., and the surivivng Americans at the annex were evacuated at around 7:30 and 10:30 a.m. Benghazi time.

    So not only is your disgust completely lacking in facts, it's downright false.

    What we are seeing here in Benghazi is the failure of the Obama Administration's ME foreign policy writ large.
    No, what we're seeing with Benghazi is just how far political parties will stoop to gain power. Any other conclusion but that is false.
    Last edited by Slyfox696; 05-12-13 at 12:16 PM.

  3. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: White House holds OFF-THE-RECORD briefing with reporters on Benghazi

    [QUOTE=Slyfox696;1061798520]Did you bother to read my post? [QUOTE]

    Uhm..... Yeah.....do you think it must have been something you said in order for you to get a response?

    Did you seem confused over the fact that no matter what Carney called it.....that others were excluded from it? Can this fact be changed that there were only select people invited? Also the other fact is......all those breakdowns, have NOT been Identified. Which if all listened to the Left and the Democrats. We wouldn't even known the Intel Agencies knew all along like as been validated by both left and right sources.

    For if they didn't know something that caused a breakdown. Then surely they cannot address what they do not know, "now".....can they?

  4. #64
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,985

    Re: White House holds OFF-THE-RECORD briefing with reporters on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    do you think it must have been something you said in order for you to get a response?
    If you had read my post, you would have had your answer. So unless it's your position you like to ask questions which have already been answered (which is entirely possible), you didn't read my post.

    Did you seem confused over the fact that no matter what Carney called it.....that others were excluded from it?
    Were you confused by the fact you would have to ask them how the 14 news agencies were determined? Were you confused by the fact there were conservative leaning news organizations there also?

    Also the other fact is......all those breakdowns, have NOT been Identified.
    http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/202446.pdf

    Please do more reading than just your simple conservative opinion pieces. You can start with the posts of mine that you quote.

  5. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Last Seen
    12-08-13 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,114

    Re: White House holds OFF-THE-RECORD briefing with reporters on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post

    Were you confused by the fact you would have to ask them how the 14 news agencies were determined? Were you confused by the fact there were conservative leaning news organizations there also?

    .
    Do you have a source to what you are calling a fact i would like to see who was in that meeting

  6. #66
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,985

    Re: White House holds OFF-THE-RECORD briefing with reporters on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by trfjr View Post
    Do you have a source to what you are calling a fact i would like to see who was in that meeting
    Quote Originally Posted by humbolt View Post
    According to Gawker, here's the list of attendees: Ben Feller (Associated Press), Jonathan Weisman and Laura Meckler (Wall Street Journal), Michael Shear and Scott Wilson (Washington Post), Caren Bohan (Reuters), David Jackson (USA Today), Carol Lee (Politico), Peter Nicholas (Tribune Co.), Margaret Talev (McClatchy), and Julianna Goldman (Bloomberg).

    I'm just going by what the Republican earlier in the thread said Gawker said. Of course, Gawker didn't even have the full list, because Carney said about 14 news agencies were represented.

  7. #67
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    18,266

    Re: White House holds OFF-THE-RECORD briefing with reporters on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    Did you bother to read my post?
    No, it's an entirely appropriate response to the nonsense flying wildly in this thread.
    If you really believe the White House publicly called a conspiratorial meeting in plain sight, then I would suggest you re-evaluate just how much you dislike Democrats/Obama.

    It already has been. Have you not been paying attention to the world? Have you been so caught up in conspiracy theories you've missed the truth?

    Does that include all the House Republican Congress people who voted to decrease the money given for the defense? Does that include the current Republican Senators who still are not asking about current defense in other places?

    What happened was tragic, everyone knows this. But what happened was the result of poor preparation, nothing else. Once the attack started, nothing could have saved Stevens and Smith, and it would have been a miracle if Woods and Doherty were still alive. The failure lied in the appropriate preparations for security, that's all. And most likely, the decisions which were made were made to not bolster security were made for legitimate reasons. I find it very hard to believe any American wanted other Americans to die.

    Let's quit trying to find someone to fire, especially since Clinton, Patraeus and Panetta are not even in their positions anymore. Let's instead focus our efforts on making sure we minimize the risk of this happening again.

    But you are! You're so worried about four people who died months ago you're not paying the slightest bit of attention to those who are still in danger! Your statement here is completely false!

    What? Who has done that?

    And doing so purely for political gain...I mean, we're to the point where Republicans are whining about e-mails in the immediate aftermath of the attack. It's pathetic people are still listening to anything they say.

    You're right, the truth is important. Here's the truth.

    1) There were breakdowns in preparation for the Benghazi residence.
    2) Those breakdowns have been identified, and according to Clinton during her testimony in January, are being resolved.
    3) Once the attack started, NOTHING could have saved Stevens or Smith
    4) Only by the most idealistic scenarios, which many times push reality to the absolute brink, could anything have been done to save Woods and Doherty.
    5) The fact is what happened in Benghazi was tragic and avoidable beforehand, but impossible to save once the attack has started.
    6) So we need to spend more time making sure our preparation in other locations prevents attacks, not whining endlessly about e-mails and nearly impossible scenarios.

    I just read this article this morning. Perhaps your distaste will subside once you read a common sense account of what happened:

    Benghazi (II): A military analysis of the Fox mystery man's fantasy rescue plan | The Best Defense

    Once you realize that, perhaps you'll realize that endangering more American lives, just for someone to welcome the news, is not only not cold and cruel, but sensitive to the fact risking more American lives which likely would not have saved any in the first place is not only bad policy, it just does not make sense.


    EDIT: By the way, help WAS sent. A CIA team from the annex came to the consulate, along with members of Libya's security forces and they removed Smith's body. The team from Tripoli arrived to the annex at about 1:30 a.m., and the surivivng Americans at the annex were evacuated at around 7:30 and 10:30 a.m. Benghazi time.

    So not only is your disgust completely lacking in facts, it's downright false.

    No, what we're seeing with Benghazi is just how far political parties will stoop to gain power. Any other conclusion but that is false.
    I did read your post, and like this one, it's about as I summarized previously. I'm not going to bother with a point by point response. Just a quick look at the number of lies told, the people who told them, and the frequency with which they were delivered is enough to discount much of what you contend. Forgive me for mentioning that the help sent was useless. You're all about not understanding that an effort should have been mounted the moment the attack began. Nobody guarantees success, but I can guarantee failure if nothing is done. And stop with the common sense BS. Common sense dictates that one should refuse to believe a known liar - or in this case, liars. It's all unraveling Sly. If you have a shred of decency, you'll stop defending the indefensible.

  8. #68
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    18,266

    Re: White House holds OFF-THE-RECORD briefing with reporters on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    I'm just going by what the Republican earlier in the thread said Gawker said. Of course, Gawker didn't even have the full list, because Carney said about 14 news agencies were represented.
    What Carney says is rarely confused with the truth. I am not a republican, BTW. Never have been, and never will be. What meeting was that, anyway? I was given to understand that because it was off record, it really didn't happen.

  9. #69
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,985

    Re: White House holds OFF-THE-RECORD briefing with reporters on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by humbolt View Post
    Just a quick look at the number of lies told, the people who told them, and the frequency with which they were delivered is enough to discount much of what you contend.
    No, they are completely unrelated. My point of contention is we need to focus on what can be done to prevent future tragedies. My point is there was virtually nothing which could be done once the attack started.

    Nothing changes those two truths. And we agree preparation should have been better leading up to the attack. You're engaging in partisan games.

    Forgive me for mentioning that the help sent was useless.
    That's not what you said and you cannot change what you said because you were wrong. You said no help was sent. Your exact words were "I should also mention that the decision not to send help" You are wrong, help was sent, in three different ways. Quit making this about political parties and just get to speaking about truth.

    You're all about not understanding that an effort should have been mounted the moment the attack began.
    IT WAS! Why are you ignoring the truth to continue in political attacks?!

    Nobody guarantees success, but I can guarantee failure if nothing is done.
    Success would have been all but impossible, did you actually read what I linked you to? All that would have been done is put more American lives on the line.

    And stop with the common sense BS.
    Yes, I'm well aware the Republican Party hates people using common sense.

    Common sense dictates that one should refuse to believe a known liar - or in this case, liars.
    Common sense dictates weighing the facts and then making a decision. That's what I'm doing. You're bringing up irrelevant information and using that to make unfounded and downright false claims.

    It's all unraveling Sly.
    What's unraveling? E-mails with changed talking points? How soon the intelligence community knew it was a terrorist attack? Nothing else is unraveling, we already know what happened. Please come out of your hyper-partisan bubble.

    If you have a shred of decency, you'll stop defending the indefensible.
    You have lied about your own words, used unrelated information to make provably false claims and ignored the truth in front of you, and you're asking me to stop defending the indefensible? Really?

  10. #70
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Last Seen
    12-08-13 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,114

    Re: White House holds OFF-THE-RECORD briefing with reporters on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    I'm just going by what the Republican earlier in the thread said Gawker said. Of course, Gawker didn't even have the full list, because Carney said about 14 news agencies were represented.
    so some so called "republican" from some gossip rag says so it is a FACT?

Page 7 of 16 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •