• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'We were wrong': CBS's Lara Logan apologizes for Benghazi report

Dog poop, the mission could have failed, in fact it almost did. Osama became shark food.

Not exactly sure what you are trying to do here but have a pretty good idea. Diversion and distortion is what obamabots are all about to try and hide the Obama incompetence. I have no idea what motivates people like you. I grew up a Democrat but learned just how screwed up the party was and how liberalism as an ideology is nothing but a failure. No where I the world has liberalism ever been a successful economic policy for it always collapses under its own weight as it runs out of other peoples' money to spend
 
Not exactly sure what you are trying to do here but have a pretty good idea. Diversion and distortion is what obamabots are all about to try and hide the Obama incompetence. I have no idea what motivates people like you. I grew up a Democrat but learned just how screwed up the party was and how liberalism as an ideology is nothing but a failure. No where I the world has liberalism ever been a successful economic policy for it always collapses under its own weight as it runs out of other peoples' money to spend

When exactly will you learn the Republicans are just as bad?
 
This was 60 minutes source right ? So because they found a guy that stretched the truth or lied outright , Benghazi didn't happen ?

Lol..the left are such cowards.

Hi testimony doesn't change the fact that the WH and Clinton tried to create a massive false narrative of a "protest" right before and election. It doesn't change the fact that Clinton lied directly to the families members as they received the bodies of they're sons.

It doesn't change the fact that the WH, after repeated request for more security and after a previous terrorist attack that blew a 12 foot hole in the compound wall AND warning from the Libyan Govt, failed to even consider a plan of action or put into place military assets needed to protect the Compound.

It doesn't change the fact that this all was most likely a way to cover up a transfer of weapons to the Libyan rebels.

It doesn't change the fact that Democrats have been stonewalling the House Committee looking into the Benghazi attack. I realize the deaths of four Americans and the lies that followed make Obama and Hillary look bad, but only Democrats would trade the lives of four Americans for political capital.
 
When exactly will you learn the Republicans are just as bad?

Unfortunately they are the only viable alternative that has a chance of making the difference. Would take a Ted Cruz in a heartbeat and that is the incrementalism needed, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz. Name for me a Democrat in their mold?
 
Not exactly sure what you are trying to do here but have a pretty good idea. Diversion and distortion is what obamabots are all about to try and hide the Obama incompetence. I have no idea what motivates people like you. I grew up a Democrat but learned just how screwed up the party was and how liberalism as an ideology is nothing but a failure. No where I the world has liberalism ever been a successful economic policy for it always collapses under its own weight as it runs out of other peoples' money to spend
I grew up as a Republican, I voted for Republicans 1964 - 1988, then I realized they didn't give a **** about the average person. I've voted for Nixon twice, Ford once, Reagan twice, and George HW Bush once then I woke up. By the way, the Good old USA has a liberal Constitution and is in fact a successful liberal country.
 
I grew up as a Republican, I voted for Republicans 1964 - 1988, then I realized they didn't give a **** about the average person. I've voted for Nixon twice, Ford once, Reagan twice, and George HW Bush once then I woke up. By the way, the Good old USA has a liberal Constitution and is in fact a successful liberal country.

Well then one of us made the right decision and if you know any history at all and the foundation upon which this country was built then you know which of us made the right one. How anyone who voted for Reagan could ever have voted for Obama twice is beyond comprehension. The exact opposite of the spectrum.
 
I grew up as a Republican, I voted for Republicans 1964 - 1988, then I realized they didn't give a **** about the average person. I've voted for Nixon twice, Ford once, Reagan twice, and George HW Bush once then I woke up. By the way, the Good old USA has a liberal Constitution and is in fact a successful liberal country.

LOL !!

Nonsense.

The Constitution is inherently Conservative as any Constitution is essentially a unchanging and fundamental declaration of principles.

There is nothing in common with our Constitution and the modern day Liberal Party. The Constitution isn't full of lies.
 
Concerns are rising due to the presence in Syria of increasing numbers of Libyans and Jihadis armed with heavy weapons, including shoulder-launched SAM missiles, known as MANPADs, looted from the vast arms stockpiles of the deposed Gadhaffi regime. Shipments of these have been observed being moved into Syria in recent months, and recently seen being distributed elsewhere across the region.

During the seven weeks since the September attack that took the life of the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, it has become evident that Eastern Libya has become a base for al Qaeda militants who have seized a growing military and political role in western-supported regime change operations in Syria.
Daily Kos: Benghazi Blowback Confirmed: US Intel Confirms Attack Linked to Pipeline of Libyan Jihadis to Syria

what the MS media will not tell you about Bengazi.
 
Back on topic. CBS to apologize tonight.

CBS to Correct Erroneous Report on Benghazi


As it prepared to broadcast a rare on-air correction Sunday for a now-discredited “60 Minutes” report, CBS News acknowledged on Friday that it had suffered a damaging blow to its credibility. Its top executive called the segment “as big a mistake as there has been” in the 45-year-old history of the celebrated news program.

The executive, Jeff Fager, conceded that CBS appeared to have been duped by the primary source for the report, a security official who told a national television audience a harrowing tale of the attack last year at the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya. On Thursday night it was disclosed that the official, Dylan Davies, had provided a completely different account in interviews with the F.B.I., in which he said he never made it to the mission that night.

After that revelation, CBS decided to take multiple actions Friday. It removed the report from the CBS News website, and the correspondent for the segment, Lara Logan, appeared on the CBS morning news show to apologize personally for the mistakes in the report. And the company’s publishing division, Simon & Schuster, said it was suspending publication of a book by Mr. Davies, in which he tells the same narrative he recounted on “60 Minutes.”

“It’s a black eye and it’s painful,” Mr. Fager said in a phone interview. He declined to say whether there would be negative consequences for any of the journalists involved.

[...]​
 
From other tv channels lol. All about those Ratings, why bother reporting the actual current news when you can milk a story like Benghazi for a year.
That would make sense if anyone cared enough about Benghazi anymore, but no one does.
And largely because it was UNDER-reported and UNDER-investigated by the networks.

So it is not in their best interest, and makes no sense, to keep a story alive that they themselves kept the public less interested in.
 
No, not really, it is because there is no evidence of wrongdoing and Faux kept doubling down on it during the election.
That would make sense if anyone cared enough about Benghazi anymore, but no one does.
And largely because it was UNDER-reported and UNDER-investigated by the networks.

So it is not in their best interest, and makes no sense, to keep a story alive that they themselves kept the public less interested in.
 
No, not really, it is because there is no evidence of wrongdoing and Faux kept
doubling down on it during the election.

LOL !!

Hillary, Obama and multiple top White House Officials purposely try to spin the death of 4 Americans by lying before an election and there is no proof of wrong doing ?

Are you just protecting your corrupt president or do you really believe that ?
 
He is all of our president, but no, I am not simply protecting him. I am pointing out the another case of screaming stupid from the right. Come up with some real evidence and I will hate him at least as bad as you do. In the mean time Faux just looks silly. Whatever happened to Obama's Katrina? that was the other theme Fox was on during the election.
LOL !!

Hillary, Obama and multiple top White House Officials purposely try to spin the death of 4 Americans by lying before an election and there is no proof of wrong doing ?

Are you just protecting your corrupt president or do you really believe that ?
 
He is all of our president, but no, I am not simply protecting him. I am pointing out the another case of screaming stupid from the right. Come up with some real evidence and I will hate him at least as bad as you do. In the mean time Faux just looks silly. Whatever happened to Obama's Katrina? that was the other theme Fox was on during the election.

You have proven nothing and still haven't addressed what happened in Benghazi. By ignoring that you are protecting the President and by his stonewalling the investigation he is assisting you in your efforts. We have a dead Ambassador and a President who claimed that justice would prevail. What justice is that? If there isn't any thing there then there would be no need for justice. Why aren't you demanding answers?

By the way, Obama's Katrina is Sandy
 
You have zero evidence. Nothing. Fox repeated the lies over and over during the election. Yes, I know it was Sandy, I was just pointing out another Faux outrage...
You have proven nothing and still haven't addressed what happened in Benghazi. By ignoring that you are protecting the President and by his stonewalling the investigation he is assisting you in your efforts. We have a dead Ambassador and a President who claimed that justice would prevail. What justice is that? If there isn't any thing there then there would be no need for justice. Why aren't you demanding answers?

By the way, Obama's Katrina is Sandy
 
You have zero evidence. Nothing. Fox repeated the lies over and over during the election. Yes, I know it was Sandy, I was just pointing out another Faux outrage...

And exactly what lies were those, did we have an Ambassador killed? Has it been over a year and no one prosecuted? Did the U.S. Military have to stand down vs. going to save the Ambassador? Was it a coordinated terrorist attack? Did survivors have to sign Non Disclosure agreements?

Take the blinders off. Obama is incompetent and making you look like a fool.
 
Present some evidence. Or drop it, it just makes the RW look even silliler
And exactly what lies were those, did we have an Ambassador killed? Has it been over a year and no one prosecuted? Did the U.S. Military have to stand down vs. going to save the Ambassador? Was it a coordinated terrorist attack? Did survivors have to sign Non Disclosure agreements?

Take the blinders off. Obama is incompetent and making you look like a fool.
 
Present some evidence. Or drop it, it just makes the RW look even silliler

The evidence is there, I asked you questions that you ignored. By the way did you report my post previously when I mentioned your age?
 
Absolutely not. I remember when I thought 30 was old. And to accuse someone of wrong doing you need evidence, not the other way around.
The evidence is there, I asked you questions that you ignored. By the way did you report my post previously when I mentioned your age?
 
He is all of our president, but no, I am not simply
protecting him. I am pointing out the another case of screaming stupid from the right. Come up with some real evidence and I will hate him at least as bad as you do. In the mean time Faux just looks silly. Whatever happened to Obama's Katrina? that was the other theme Fox was on during the election.

Your'e absolutley protecting him. Hey its either that or your real easy to lie to.

Which is it ? By now his credibillity among any American with even a modest amount of intelligence is in question.

Conservatives knew the man was without integrity pre-2008.

So either your'e a partisan who's justified his lies or your an idiot and I dont think your'e stupid at all.

I don't think you were taken in by his protest cover-up. I dont think ANYONE was taken in by his protest cover up.

How far will you go to redefine the meaning of whats dishonest and whats not ?
 
Present some evidence of wrong doing. That is not protecting him, I would have the same standard for anyone, even you.;)
Your'e absolutley protecting him. Hey its either that or your real easy to lie to.

Which is it ? By now his credibillity among any American with even a modest amount of intelligence is in question.

Conservatives knew the man was without integrity pre-2008.

So either your'e a partisan who's justified his lies or your an idiot and I dont think your'e stupid at all.

I don't think you were taken in by his protest cover-up. I dont think ANYONE was taken in by his protest cover up.

How far will you go to redefine the meaning of whats dishonest and whats not ?
 
Present some evidence of wrong doing. That is not protecting him, I would have the same standard for anyone, even you.;)

All you do is buy what you are told. "show me some evidence" is nothing more than a typical diversion from an Obamabot, someone who will buy the Obama rhetoric and actually pays no attention to the facts. Presenting facts to you is a waste of time, do some research and tell us what exactly Obama did to save our Ambassador and to prosecute those who killed him?

You support an incompetent and all you do is defend him. That makes you look foolish. It is your dishonesty and attempts at diversion which is evident here.

Benghazi: Can Survivors Answer the Growing List of Questions? | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation
 
Present some evidence of wrong doing. That is not protecting him, I would have
the same standard for anyone, even you.;)

It's a bit difficult to cite evidence when the Obama administration is doing everything in their power to hide any information tied to the Benghazzi terror attack.

But lets discuss some things we know are true. There was a previous attack on the compound that blew a 12 foot hole in the compound wall.

Ambasador Stevens repeatedly asked for extra security and his request were denied.( and no it wasn't because of a lack of funding )

Other Western Nations decided to pull out because of the danger and WE didn't even provide additional security.

A UN report tied the attackers to a Terroist orginization called the Muhamed Jamal Network.

The Libyan Government warned the Americans 3 days before the attack that an attack had breen planned.


That said, do you STILL believe Obama and Hillary's description of the attack as a "protest " ?
 
Back
Top Bottom