• 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!

State Department: Stop asking us about the Beghazi attack

Harshaw

Filmmaker ● Lawyer ● Patriot
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
38,750
Reaction score
13,845
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
State Department: Stop asking us about the Benghazi attack | The Cable

"I'm going to frustrate all of you, infinitely, by telling you that now that we have an open FBI investigation on the death of these four Americans, we are not going to be in a position to talk at all about what the U.S. government may or may not be learning about how any of this this happened -- not who they were, not how it happened, not what happened to Ambassador Stevens, not any of it -- until the Justice Department is ready to talk about the investigation that's its got," State Department spokeswoman Victorian Nuland told reporters late Friday afternoon.
"So I'm going to send to the FBI for those kinds of questions and they're probably not going to talk to you about it," she said.

...

"I will make a personal pledge to you that if I become aware that information we gave that first night is radically wrong in a way that you deserve to know, I will do my best to get that information to you," Nuland said. "But I have to respect the fact that this is now a crime scene."

It's not a "crime scene." It's the site of an act of war and an egregious security breach.

Preposterous. Will the press give them this pass? They shouldn't.
 
It's not a "crime scene." It's the site of an act of war and an egregious security breach.

Preposterous. Will the press give them this pass? They shouldn't.

You are absolutely correct, but Obama will hide behind the "crime scene" scenario to avoid accountability and the press will help him do it.
 
State Department: Stop asking us about the Benghazi attack | The Cable

It's not a "crime scene." It's the site of an act of war and an egregious security breach.

Preposterous. Will the press give them this pass? They shouldn't.

FBI is responsible for specific terrorism-related offenses, such as violence at airports, money laundering, attacks on U.S. officials, and others. While I agree that something(s) went horribly wrong and needs to be ferreted out, that can only happen after a full investigation has taken place and in order for those breaches to be corrected, much of the findings won't be disclosed, as in doing so, it would compromise the integrity of the alterations to security that will invariably result. I don't believe it is beneficial for any discovery to be shared with the public at large, especially while tensions in the region remain so inflamed.

I don't see anything out of line with what the State Department said here.
 
You are absolutely correct, but Obama will hide behind the "crime scene" scenario to avoid accountability and the press will help him do it.

How is this any different from the Cheney admin hiding behind info on 9/11?
 
So which country do we attack?

It was perpetrated by an al Qaeda group. Are we not at war with al Qaeda (and all terrorists with a global reach)?
 
How is this any different from the Cheney admin hiding behind info on 9/11?

Aside from its irrelevance, it's another hilarious attempt to justify this administration by saying The Worst Administration Ever (TM) did the same thing. I guess this is also The Worst Administration Ever (TM), as they're so equivalent. Right?
 
FBI is responsible for specific terrorism-related offenses, such as violence at airports, money laundering, attacks on U.S. officials, and others. While I agree that something(s) went horribly wrong and needs to be ferreted out, that can only happen after a full investigation has taken place and in order for those breaches to be corrected, much of the findings won't be disclosed, as in doing so, it would compromise the integrity of the alterations to security that will invariably result. I don't believe it is beneficial for any discovery to be shared with the public at large, especially while tensions in the region remain so inflamed.

I don't see anything out of line with what the State Department said here.

This is not an "offense," a crime scene. It's an act of war. How did you not get that in my post?
 
It was perpetrated by an al Qaeda group. Are we not at war with al Qaeda (and all terrorists with a global reach)?

Okay how do we go about persecuting this war?

If not treating the scene as a crime scene and gathering as much information as possible.
 
Okay how do we go about persecuting this war?

Isn't that what all the drone attacks and killing bin Laden have been about?

If not treating the scene as a crime scene and gathering as much information as possible.

This does not prevent the State Department from talking about it. It's an excuse, a cop-out, a run-and-hide.
 
This is not an "offense," a crime scene. It's an act of war. How did you not get that in my post?

I did get that in your post...I simply don't agree with it. Just because you said it's an act of war doesn't make that a true statement. You seem to presume that just because I don't agree with your assertion that this is an act of war, ergo, I must believe it's a "crime scene"...maybe you're the one who's projecting your presumptuous nature on to me?? The attacks on al-Khobar Towers in Saudi and the attacks on our embassies in Tanzania and Kenya were not considered acts of war either. If I would define it as anything, it would be an act of terrorism and as such, falls under the jurisdiction of the FBI. It would appear that US Gov't policy and its history of procedure handling attacks of this nature supports my statement.
 
Last edited:
This does not prevent the State Department from talking about it. It's an excuse, a cop-out, a run-and-hide.


Hog wash, crime scenes often have elements that investigators don't disclose for very valid reasons
 
I did get that in your post...I simply don't agree with it. Just because you said it's an act of war doesn't make that a true statement. The attacks on al-Khobar Towers in Saudi and the attacks on our embassies in Tanzania and Kenya were not considered acts of war either.

Those attacks were prior to the actual policy of the war on terror.

If it's not a war, then what are all the drone attacks and the SEAL raid which killed bin Laden?
 
Hog wash, crime scenes often have elements that investigators don't disclose for very valid reasons

This is just an excuse. It's not a crime scene.
 
Those attacks were prior to the actual policy of the war on terror.

If it's not a war, then what are all the drone attacks and the SEAL raid which killed bin Laden?

Good point. Let's not forget the drone attack on a US citizen in Yemen, too.
 
This is just an excuse. It's not a crime scene.

You don't think they should be investigating the scene gathering evidence and information?

Like they do at crime scenes.
 
You don't think they should be investigating the scene gathering evidence and information?

Like they do at crime scenes.

Sure, but it's not a crime, so there's no need to maintain the same kind of silence. It's not like they need to worry about tainting evidence or a potential jury. That's why you maintain silence.

If the State Department doesn't want to tip off the enemy because they've discovered something valuable, that's one thing. But that's not what the State Department said. They said it's out of their hands; it's a crime scene, and we can't comment. That's bovine excrement.
 
Sure, but it's not a crime, so there's no need to maintain the same kind of silence. It's not like they need to worry about tainting evidence or a potential jury. That's why you maintain silence.
.

Fine let's let AQ know what we learn so they can make accommodations for their next attack:roll:
 
Those attacks were prior to the actual policy of the war on terror.

If it's not a war, then what are all the drone attacks and the SEAL raid which killed bin Laden?

What I cited above is taken directly from the FBI's web site, which, incidentally, is a policy that is current...meaning, it IS part of the actual policy of the war on terror.
 
I have no problem with them not wanting to disclose information that might tip-off Al Qaeda in Libya that we might be close to dropping bombs on their heads.

But to use the excuse of the "Justice Department" ? Don't blow smoke up my ass is all.
 
Fine let's let AQ know what we learn so they can make accommodations for their next attack:roll:

Why did you dishonestly snip this from my post when you quoted it?

If the State Department doesn't want to tip off the enemy because they've discovered something valuable, that's one thing. But that's not what the State Department said. They said it's out of their hands; it's a crime scene, and we can't comment. That's bovine excrement.
 
What I cited above is taken directly from the FBI's web site, which, incidentally, is a policy that is current...meaning, it IS part of the actual policy of the war on terror.

That said, I totally agree with you in that this is not a "crime scene"...I won't ever accuse this administration of speaking competently.
 
What I cited above is taken directly from the FBI's web site, which, incidentally, is a policy that is current...meaning, it IS part of the actual policy of the war on terror.

Where are you seeing this?
 
Aside from its irrelevance, it's another hilarious attempt to justify this administration by saying The Worst Administration Ever (TM) did the same thing. I guess this is also The Worst Administration Ever (TM), as they're so equivalent. Right?

No. I'm just pointing out nobody should be surprised.

After all, we are a nation that admits to running secret prisons and engages in kidnapping on the international scene. Ideas like the Rule of Law are nothing but dusty good hearted jokes.
 
Back
Top Bottom