• 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!

U.S. Captures Benghazi Suspect in Secret Raid.....

Ockham said:
What side am I on? :lol:

My post and point was about the name "ring leader" being used.
Click to expand...


He posted up my same link yet doesn't give you the name of one of the 3 the FBI showed Photos of. The one guy was Killed in Egypt. The other Fled to Tunisia. The 3rd was here.



Believed to be in his 40s, Khattala was imprisoned for many years by the Gaddafi regime for his Islamic views.

The FBI believes other groups were also involved in the Benghazi attacks and is pursuing criminal charges against several individuals, including Abu Sufian bin Qumu, the leader of Ansar al-Sharia in the Libyan city of Darnah. Qumu has also been designated a terrorist by the State Department, as has his group.

In 2007, Qumu was released from the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and sent to Libya, where he was detained. Gaddafi’s government released him in 2008....snip~

U.S. captures Benghazi suspect in secret raid - The Washington Post
 
Fenton said:
LOL !!

Bush tangents are funny !

Irrelevant but funny. Did the Bush administration manufacture some BS narrative over the deaths of four Americans because it was Politically expedient ?

Big difference.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you find Dead Americans funny under Bush. Shows your un-American attitude and faux outrage for the deaths of Americans. You just want to politicize it since it's under Obama. Some on the right are just pathetic un-American garbage.
 
Here ya go once again.....the Leader of Ansar Al Sharia in ALL of Libya.



_75345571_zahawi.jpg

Mohammad al-Zahawi, head of Ansar al-Sharia

Note the name is almost identical to the Z Man of AQ.


The group

_75347532_ansar.jpg


Ansar al-Sharia is an Islamist militia calling for the implementation of strict Sharia law across Libya. The group, whose name means "Partisans of Islamic law" in Arabic, emerged following the February 2011 anti-Gaddafi uprising. It is made up of former rebels from several militias based in eastern Libya, notably the Abu Obayda bin al-Jarah Brigade, the Malik Brigade and the 17 February Brigade.

The group was officially formed in June 2012 when it issued the "Ansar al-Sharia First Meeting", a communique announcing its inauguration. The number of rebels that fight for the group remains unknown. The group operates mainly in Benghazi and denies having any presence elsewhere in Libya.

The group's base in Benghazi's Quwarshah district was reportedly bombarded with surface-to-surface missiles by Gen Haftar's forces.....snip~

BBC News - Profile: Libya's Ansar al-Sharia
 
Grant said:
I really do not understand why they try to defend Barrack Obama from justified criticism, as though he is something more than a politician. They just don't want to know What's Goin' On.
Click to expand...

The key is justified. Much of what is throw out against him is supposition, exaggeration, unsupported hate.
 
Little is known about Mr al-Zawahi. He is from eastern Libya and was jailed in Tripoli's Abu Salim prison for standing up to Gaddafi.

They were not known [in] Libya before the revolution. We had the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, we had the Muslim Brotherhood, we had Salafis but this group, we did not hear about until recently, until after the revolution started," Libyan diplomat Ahmad Jibril has told the BBC.

In October 2012, the group became known as Ansar al-Sharia in Libya (ASL), most likely to differentiate itself from Tunisia's Ansar al-Sharia group. From October 2012 onwards, Ansar al-Sharia had confrontations with a number of Libyan groups, many of which joined the Libyan army in Benghazi. Following these confrontations, the group reduced its military presence in the city but kept close links to the prominent Islamist 17 February Brigade group.

The group denies any links to al-Qaeda or other militant groups outside Libya, although the Tunisian security officials pointed to operational, financial and logistical links between Ansar al-Sharia in Libya and Ansar al-Sharia in Tunisia (AST), with the latter receiving weapons from its Libyan counterpart.....snip~ <<<<< Oh Lookie, Heres a Clue!!!!!

BBC News - Profile: Libya's Ansar al-Sharia


Yes.....the same one and only 17th Feb. Brigade. The same group that Someone working in the US State Dept Hired for US Security. Someones name.....that will eventually come out into the light.
 
Last edited:
Ockham said:
According to much of the media and according to him. He claims he's just a Libyan citizen living at home. The only place "ringleader" is used is in the headlines. No government statement or charges against him describe him as a ringleader of anything.
Click to expand...

According to the right wing media. And what do you EXPECT a ringleader to say?

You guys really, really love the alternate reality you've built. We get it.
 
Threegoofs said:
According to the right wing media. And what do you EXPECT a ringleader to say?

You guys really, really love the alternate reality you've built. We get it.
Click to expand...


I doubt the NY Times is Right Wing Media. Or the BBC.....Or the Guardian. Care to try again?

But then there is just reality and the facts. Despite those that watch a lot of Hogan's Heroes.
noevil.gif



Timeline:

September 22, 2012: Fawzi Bukatef, leader of the February 17 Martyrs Brigades, says that the Obama administration took no action during the attacks on the mission in Benghazi, and that “We [the Brigade] had to coordinate everything.” Bukatef's account is entirely consistent with Libyan Interior Minister Wanis al-Sharif's earlier assertion that Libyan security forces had essentially handed the U.S. mission personnel over to the attackers.....snip~
 
MMC said:
I doubt the NY Times is Right Wing Media. Or the BBC.....Or the Guardian. Care to try again?

But then there is just reality and the facts. Despite those that watch a lot of Hogan's Heroes.
noevil.gif



Timeline:

September 22, 2012: Fawzi Bukatef, leader of the February 17 Martyrs Brigades, says that the Obama administration took no action during the attacks on the mission in Benghazi, and that “We [the Brigade] had to coordinate everything.” Bukatef's account is entirely consistent with Libyan Interior Minister Wanis al-Sharif's earlier assertion that Libyan security forces had essentially handed the U.S. mission personnel over to the attackers.....snip~
Click to expand...

Oh, yes.

In MMCspeak, when the NYT uses the word 'leader', it is not the same as 'ringleader', because the depth of MMCs knowledge of English clearly stated these are different words and have additional, and different consonants, plus a totally different vowel.
 
Buck Ewer said:
Time will show that you are on the wrong side of this scum...
Click to expand...
The rightists wanted someone caught for "4 dead in Ben--gha--zi" before someone was caught .
 
Grant said:
It seems you didn't read the agreement. It was the decision of Barrack Obama to leave, not George Bush. There were caveats.
Click to expand...

Seems you don't remember much about recent history. Obama was pushing to stay but instead he listened to the generals on the ground who advised him otherwise.
 
WCH said:
And now [quite by surprise according to the Admin] the situation has changed.

And again, you (and yours) revert back to blaming Bush while attempting to absolve Obama of any responsibility. Do I need to tell you how foolish that looks?
Click to expand...

Why is it you conservatives keep ignoring the facts of what happened? Ignoring plain and simple facts is what looks foolish. Bush laid out the ground work in that agreement. Obama wanted to stay beyond that date but was advised by the generals on the ground to stick to the agreement... so he did.

Had you conservatives listened to us hippy liberals and true libertarians in the first place you'd not have been so brazen as to make the foolish mistake of going into Iraq in the first place. Your boy Bush destroyed the fragile stability in the Middle East and you want to lay that at Obama's feet. Ridiculous. Instead you guys followed the advise of a president who didn't know the difference between Sunni and Shiites all while following idiot boy McCain's word that there has been no evidence of Sunni's and Shiite's having violent clashes in the past.

Republicans live in a completely fact free world.
 
Last edited:
Threegoofs said:
Oh, yes.

In MMCspeak, when the NYT uses the word 'leader', it is not the same as 'ringleader', because the depth of MMCs knowledge of English clearly stated these are different words and have additional, and different consonants, plus a totally different vowel.
Click to expand...



Well the NY Times never told you to focus on one sentence when there are more facts to the story. Especially knowing there is more than just one sentence and not just one specific word.......that one clings to in desperation, or can look to play off of. :roll:
 
MMC said:
Well the NY Times never told you to focus on one sentence when there are more facts to the story. Especially knowing there is more than just one sentence and not just one specific word.......that one clings to in desperation, or can look to play off of. :roll:
Click to expand...

If I can translate the gibberish, it seems like you are saying calling him a 'leader' is not supported by the rest of the story. And that a specific word is not the whole story.

Yet you blasted a post saying 'ringleader' , a specific word, was not used by others, so it must be false.

So specific words are good when you want to make a retarded point, but incorrect when others refute it.

Got it.
 
poweRob said:
Why is it you conservatives keep ignoring the facts of what happened? Ignoring plain and simple facts is what looks foolish. Bush laid out the ground work in that agreement. Obama wanted to stay beyond that date but was advised by the generals on the ground to stick to the agreement... so he did.

Had you conservatives listened to us hippy liberals and true libertarians in the first place you'd not have been so brazen as to make the foolish mistake of going into Iraq in the first place. Your boy Bush destroyed the fragile stability in the Middle East and you want to lay that at Obama's feet. Ridiculous. Instead you guys followed the advise of a president who didn't know the difference between Sunni and Shiites all while following idiot boy McCain's word that there has been no evidence of Sunni's and Shiite's having violent clashes in the past.

Republicans live in a completely fact free world.
Click to expand...

What you are claiming is false. Obama ignored general's pleas to keep American forces in Iraq - Washington Times

Also the the Obama Administration owns Iraq, claiming it was their greatest achievement. Biden in 2010: Iraq Will Be 'One of the Great Achievements' of this Administration
 
Chaddelamancha said:
How come these terrorists are always captured around election time? :shocked2:
Click to expand...

Election time? It is June. If you want to come up with a conspiracy theory at least make it a conspiracy worthy of pause and consideration.
 
upsideguy said:
Election time? It is June.
If you want to come up with a conspiracy theory at least make it a conspiracy worthy of pause and consideration.
Click to expand...
Election time is now everyday with these guys--especially with a year's worth of Koch hit ads so far.
There would never have been a good time for Obama to get this guy--Obama's praise by the GOP on bin Laden was barely audible .
 
Grant said:
What you are claiming is false. Obama ignored general's pleas to keep American forces in Iraq - Washington Times

Also the the Obama Administration owns Iraq, claiming it was their greatest achievement. Biden in 2010: Iraq Will Be 'One of the Great Achievements' of this Administration
Click to expand...

Yeah.. I see your hack sources of Washington Times and Breitbart and raise you Time:

Iraq’s Government, Not Obama, Called Time on the U.S. Troop Presence
Oct. 21, 2011

But ending the U.S. troop presence in Iraq was an overwhelmingly popular demand among Iraqis, and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki appears to have been unwilling to take the political risk of extending it. While he was inclined to see a small number of American soldiers stay behind to continue mentoring Iraqi forces, the likes of Shi’ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, on whose support Maliki’s ruling coalition depends, were having none of it. Even the Obama Administration’s plan to keep some 3,000 trainers behind failed because the Iraqis were unwilling to grant them the legal immunity from local prosecution that is common to SOF agreements in most countries where U.S. forces are based.​
 
poweRob said:
Yeah.. I see your hack sources of Washington Times and Breitbart and raise you Time
Click to expand...

Hack sources?? Are you saying that it wasn't Joe Biden speaking??? Someone pretended it was phoney Joe

And if you genuinely don't know that the military wanted troops left in Iraq then you should question your own sources.
 
Grant said:
Hack sources?? Are you saying that it wasn't Joe Biden speaking??? Someone pretended it was phoney Joe

And if you genuinely don't know that the military wanted troops left in Iraq then you should question your own sources.
Click to expand...

Yes. Breitbart and Washington Times are COMPLETELY unreliable PoS hack sources.
 
Threegoofs said:
If I can translate the gibberish, it seems like you are saying calling him a 'leader' is not supported by the rest of the story. And that a specific word is not the whole story.

Yet you blasted a post saying 'ringleader' , a specific word, was not used by others, so it must be false.

So specific words are good when you want to make a retarded point, but incorrect when others refute it.

Got it.
Click to expand...



Its not on me that you can't read who BO's FBI named as the Leaders and passed out photos over a year and a half ago.....moreover the only thing that is in dispute about the Story is the Timing and BO's motives. Which can be shown.....that he had known where this guy has been all the time. Could have captured him in London or even in transit to Britain.

So your condition that affects those faculties that help most of the Average population speak and read English.....will eventually re-correct itself. Naturally there are those in the field of mental health, that can help you should you feel.....all is just to much for you to handle on your own.
 
poweRob said:
Why is it you conservatives keep ignoring the facts of what happened? Ignoring plain and simple facts is what looks foolish. Bush laid out the ground work in that agreement. Obama wanted to stay beyond that date but was advised by the generals on the ground to stick to the agreement... so he did.

Had you conservatives listened to us hippy liberals and true libertarians in the first place you'd not have been so brazen as to make the foolish mistake of going into Iraq in the first place. Your boy Bush destroyed the fragile stability in the Middle East and you want to lay that at Obama's feet. Ridiculous. Instead you guys followed the advise of a president who didn't know the difference between Sunni and Shiites all while following idiot boy McCain's word that there has been no evidence of Sunni's and Shiite's having violent clashes in the past.

Republicans live in a completely fact free world.
Click to expand...

I said the SITUATION CHANGED and as with most of his action [or lack thereof] the CURRENT POTUS is inept.

And your 'fragile stability' is a friggin myth. The ME has been a thorn in America's side sense our inception.
 
Last edited:
MMC said:
Its not on me that you can't read who BO's FBI named as the Leaders and passed out photos over a year and a half ago.....moreover the only thing that is in dispute about the Story is the Timing and BO's motives. Which can be shown.....that he had known where this guy has been all the time. Could have captured him in London or even in transit to Britain.

So your condition that affects those faculties that help most of the Average population speak and read English.....will eventually re-correct itself. Naturally there are those in the field of mental health, that can help you should you feel.....all is just to much for you to handle on your own.
Click to expand...

Again, not real coherent sentence structure.

But it seems that you are saying that he IS a leader, just not a 'ring' leader, and the real problem is that the timing of his capture was political....because, as we all know, Obama wants to have Benghazi in the headlines as much as possible, and knew by letting the guy walk around, he could extend the story.

Or maybe you're not saying that. To be honest, your writing is about as clear as your thought process.
 
Threegoofs said:
Again, not real coherent sentence structure.

But it seems that you are saying that he IS a leader, just not a 'ring' leader, and the real problem is that the timing of his capture was political....because, as we all know, Obama wants to have Benghazi in the headlines as much as possible, and knew by letting the guy walk around, he could extend the story.

Or maybe you're not saying that. To be honest, your writing is about as clear as your thought process.
Click to expand...


Oh its real coherent.....its that condition you told me about that gives you such problems. Did the professionals tell you that you could have more trouble due to low intelligence? Perhap checkin into that can help you out even more. This way you will know.....whether you should speak or not.
 
MMC said:
Oh its real coherent.....its that condition you told me about that gives you such problems. Did the professionals tell you that you could have more trouble due to low intelligence? Perhap checkin into that can help you out even more. This way you will know.....whether you should speak or not.
Click to expand...

Not surprisingly, I have no idea what you're talking about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom