Page 7 of 14 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 136

Thread: Susan Rice defends Benghazi interviews on 60 Minutes

  1. #61
    Educator BlackAsCoal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    11-04-15 @ 01:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    702

    Re: Susan Rice defends Benghazi interviews on 60 Minutes

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    That's air-support for local ground forces, not an invasion.

    That's as rediculous as people claiming United States invaded Vietnam.

    Most of the destruction in Libya was cause by the rebels and government forces.
    It was the destruction of a sovereign nation based on lies .. no differently than Iraq and what we had planned for Syria.

    We bombed a peaceful and prosperous nation back into the Stone Age .. and we used AL QUEDA as our ground forces.

    Al Queda is our enemy .. sure they are.

    How do you 'humanitarianly' drop massive bombs on densely packed cities?
    “No people can be both ignorant and free.”
    - Thomas Jefferson

  2. #62
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,986

    Re: Susan Rice defends Benghazi interviews on 60 Minutes

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Nixon resigned over a smaller lie than that.
    It amazes me how people can actually think this...

    Nixon resigned because he knew he would be impeached (with a real possibility of conviction) for charges related to breaking several federal laws. That's not a "smaller lie", no matter how much you want it to be.

    Even if we say the attack had NOTHING to do with the video (which the New York Times article disputes) and the Obama Administration KNEW it had nothing to do with a video (which, again, can be disputed), and they told a lie which said it was because of a video, that still would not be breaking federal laws, it would simply be a lie. And the lie, as we know now, would have been made to protect American intelligence interests in the Middle East, not for political gain. After all, it makes no sense to claim the Obama Administration lied for political gain when they knew (if we assume the video had nothing to do with it) the video story would be debunked.


    In other words, your little comment here is utterly absurd and you should rethink such statements before you make them.

  3. #63
    Sage
    Born Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Sonny and Nice
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:49 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,396

    Re: Susan Rice defends Benghazi interviews on 60 Minutes

    Quote Originally Posted by sedan View Post
    You know, one of the things the scandalmongers never like to talk about is how there really were worldwide protests against the video on that day.

    What did that have to do with Benghazi and Susan Rice lying to the American People. That is something you liberals don't want to talk about, is the truth.
    Liberals - Punish the Successful, Reward the Unsuccessful
    Liberals - Tax, Borrow, Spend, and Give Free Stuff
    Obama's legacy - President Donald Trump

  4. #64
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,315

    Re: Susan Rice defends Benghazi interviews on 60 Minutes

    Quote Originally Posted by sedan View Post
    The point, of course, is that it was never unreasonable to suppose that the attacks were related to the video.

    ...
    Interestingly, there's an article in today's NYT still saying the video was a primary cause of the attack:

    Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.
    Yes ... I heard about that ... and I also heard both factions on the House Intelligence Committee take exception to the NYT piece.

    AND ... you can't discount the possibility that ...

    NYT LIFESAVER TO HILLARY.jpg

  5. #65
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,986

    Re: Susan Rice defends Benghazi interviews on 60 Minutes

    Quote Originally Posted by Born Free View Post
    What did that have to do with Benghazi and Susan Rice lying to the American People. That is something you liberals don't want to talk about, is the truth.
    I guess reading the whole thread would just be too much for you to handle?

    Quote Originally Posted by sedan View Post
    The point, of course, is that it was never unreasonable to suppose that the attacks were related to the video.

    And there were people in the CIA saying that it was, which is why the talking points given to Susan Rice by the CIA included those statements.

    For me, the map indicates how very unusual it would be for there not to be a protest in Libya on a day when protests against the video were so ubiquitous across the Muslim world.

    Interestingly, there's an article in today's NYT still saying the video was a primary cause of the attack:
    Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.
    But hey, good for you on criticizing an entire group of people because of your lack of effort.

  6. #66
    Sage
    polgara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 11:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,356

    Re: Susan Rice defends Benghazi interviews on 60 Minutes

    Quote Originally Posted by bubbabgone View Post
    Yes ... I heard about that ... and I also heard both factions on the House Intelligence Committee take exception to the NYT piece.

    AND ... you can't discount the possibility that ...

    NYT LIFESAVER TO HILLARY.jpg
    Sure can't! Could this mean she's planning another run, even though she has consistently stated she's not interested?

    Greetings, bubba!

  7. #67
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,315

    Re: Susan Rice defends Benghazi interviews on 60 Minutes

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    Sure can't! Could this mean she's planning another run, even though she has consistently stated she's not interested?

    Greetings, bubba!
    Sure could ... those people are like mice ... if it's not the same ones coming back they're new ones reproducing too fast to keep up.

    How you doin', Pol?

  8. #68
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,584

    Re: Susan Rice defends Benghazi interviews on 60 Minutes

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    It amazes me how people can actually think this...

    Nixon resigned because he knew he would be impeached (with a real possibility of conviction) for charges related to breaking several federal laws. That's not a "smaller lie", no matter how much you want it to be.

    Even if we say the attack had NOTHING to do with the video (which the New York Times article disputes) and the Obama Administration KNEW it had nothing to do with a video (which, again, can be disputed), and they told a lie which said it was because of a video, that still would not be breaking federal laws, it would simply be a lie. And the lie, as we know now, would have been made to protect American intelligence interests in the Middle East, not for political gain. After all, it makes no sense to claim the Obama Administration lied for political gain when they knew (if we assume the video had nothing to do with it) the video story would be debunked.


    In other words, your little comment here is utterly absurd and you should rethink such statements before you make them.
    A lie is a lie. This lie is bigger than any lie told by Nixon. The people lied about how Americans got murdered.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  9. #69
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,944

    Re: Susan Rice defends Benghazi interviews on 60 Minutes

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    Sure can't! Could this mean she's planning another run, even though she has consistently stated she's not interested?

    Greetings, bubba!
    Oh, never...nudge-nudge/wink-wink. Remember "Eight years for Bill, and eight years for Hill"?

  10. #70
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,986

    Re: Susan Rice defends Benghazi interviews on 60 Minutes

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    A lie is a lie.
    No, it's not. Trying to reduce complex situations to simple ones shows either a lack of knowledge of how the world works or an intentional dishonesty necessary to achieve criticism you insist on leveling.

    A lie is not a lie. If I lie to police in a murder investigation, intentionally trying to throw them off the trail of the suspect, that's a significantly different lie than if I told my police officer buddy at the diner a whopper about how big of a fish I caught last weekend. A lie is not a lie, and for you to try and claim so is simply false.

    This lie is bigger than any lie told by Nixon.
    Again, ignoring the NYT article which says it's not really a lie, no it's not. As I said, Nixon didn't resign for telling lies, he was going to be impeached for breaking the law. Take your partisan blinders off for a second and just think how ridiculous your statement is right now.

    The people lied about how Americans got murdered.
    Again, if we ignore the evidence from the NYT article, the lie very possibly could have saved the lives of many more Americans and their intelligence assets. It seems rather hypocritical to be upset about lying about the deaths of Americans, when said lies possibly protected the lives of Americans.

Page 7 of 14 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
  •