• 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!

Threats Against Benghazi Whistleblowers Alleged [W:345/361]

Helix said:
like the Benghazi story, most of the media didn't cover it as a conspiracy. msnbc might have, but i don't follow that network.
Click to expand...
You didn't apply your google analysis process yet you assume there might have been a coverup of those attacks despite nary a contemporary murmur ... yet despite documents & witnesses about Benghazi popping up over the 6 month period you say uh-uh, nothing to see here, move along.
Curious.
 
Helix said:
i'll consider the fox story if you can show me a similar level of fox coverage of any embassy attack which occurred under the previous administration. there were twelve attacks during the Bush years.
Click to expand...

Helix. This one was very different. Or wouldn't you even agree on that? An ambassador was murdered and dragged through the streets. Two marines died waiting for help that never came. Security at the mission was cut in spite of proven requests for additional help. (Frankly, I don't give a damned whether or not it was a terrorist attack or caused by the YouTube video; that was never the point with me.)

And let me make it easy. There would appear to be no editorializing in the Fox News story. Merely a presentation of fact. It gets dangerous when we discount everything any media source. Frankly? Including outlets like Brietbart and others. Trust but verify and/or Do't trust but check it out anyhow.

tererun said:
Fox news is home of soft core conspiracy crap. They have a terrible reputation. It does not mean they cannot publish a fact at tiomes, but that one should certainly not watch them to hear facts. You can keep saying that this article is fine, but it never addressed fox's reputation at all. If that were the way things worked then Obama would be a good presidnet the moment he mad a decision you thought was good. Does that sound silly to you, because it does to me. No, fox is a terrible and inaccurate news station that has been caught in a number of blatant lies. Oh, and you have reframed the argument from fox being unreliable to whether or not the article is unreliable. Terrible tactic which changes the argument into something you think you can defend because you know you cannot defend the reputation of faux news.
Click to expand...

You are off point in the discussion.

tererun said:
Good, get back to the original point and don't let maggie reframe the argument to something different because she cannot answer the original point.
Click to expand...

You don't even know what "the argument" is about.

bubbabgone said:
You don't trust Fox. Got it. Who do you trust?
Click to expand...

Johnny Carson?

------------------------

Folks, 90% of media outlets are owned by 6 -- that's SIX!! -- corporate giants. Six CEO's. That's consolidated from fifty back in 1983.

He who controls the news controls the views.
Click to expand...

Listener beware. Again: Trust but verify -- or Don't trust but check it out anyway.
 
Helix is getting pounded here.
 
MMC said:
That's amusing.....considering Fox is a major News Source. While MSDNC(MSNBC cable) isn't.
Click to expand...

no, both fox and msnbc are confirmation bias / entertainment networks.
 
bubbabgone said:
You didn't apply your google analysis process yet you assume there might have been a coverup of those attacks despite nary a contemporary murmur
Click to expand...

no, i don't think there was a conspiracy in either case.

bubbabgone said:
... yet despite documents & witnesses about Benghazi popping up over the 6 month period you say uh-uh, nothing to see here, move along.
Curious.
Click to expand...

"documents" and "witnesses" have been popping up for 12 years concerning 9/11 truther nonsense, as well. and Kennedy's assassination. and pretty much every other conspiracy theory.
 
AlabamaPaul said:
There's probably a political cartoon in there somewhere for this. Good evening bubba...
Click to expand...
I learned a lesson my first day here that when you do something like that about another member, a point infraction awaits.
How've you been. AP?
 
bubbabgone said:
I learned a lesson my first day here that when you do something like that about another member, a point infraction awaits.
How've you been. AP?
Click to expand...

Doing well, thank you. Sometimes infractions are worth the "effort". They expire rather quickly... Oh, and they can relate to the subject without mentioning another member... ;)
 
Helix said:
...
"documents" and "witnesses" have been popping up for 12 years concerning 9/11 truther nonsense, as well. and Kennedy's assassination. and pretty much every other conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...

Serious suggestion for ya ... try to be a lot more discerning when drawing parallels among event aftermaths like that. They're not all the same.
 
MaggieD said:
Helix. This one was very different. Or wouldn't you even agree on that? An ambassador was murdered and dragged through the streets. Two marines died waiting for help that never came. Security at the mission was cut in spite of proven requests for additional help. (Frankly, I don't give a damned whether or not it was a terrorist attack or caused by the YouTube video; that was never the point with me.)
Click to expand...

what happened in Benghazi is that a small portion of a larger population which has been repressed by secular dictators and religious leaders finally boiled over, radicalized, and attacked the convenient demon, which happened to be us because we had a presence there. we also have a long history of activity in the middle east, and they hate us like we would hate them if Libya had a major presence and influence in Mexico and Canada. they basically caught us off guard, and we never should have been there in the first place. this, however, doesn't equate to an "all the way to the top" conspiracy and coverup.
 
Helix said:
what happened in Benghazi is that a small portion of a larger population which has been repressed by secular dictators and religious leaders finally boiled over, radicalized, and attacked the convenient demon, which happened to be us because we had a presence there. we also have a long history of activity in the middle east, and they hate us like we would hate them if Libya had a major presence and influence in Mexico and Canada. they basically caught us off guard, and we never should have been there in the first place. this, however, doesn't equate to an "all the way to the top" conspiracy and coverup.
Click to expand...

I can like that post! I don't doubt anything you've said -- even your last sentence. But bright lights should be welcomed not dimmed.
 
AlabamaPaul said:
Doing well, thank you. Sometimes infractions are worth the "effort". They expire rather quickly... Oh, and they can relate to the subject without mentioning another member... ;)
Click to expand...

I got infracted for saying what we used to say to each other everyday on Politico (It was only a JOKE by the way)............go figure........................
 
Helix said:
no, both fox and msnbc are confirmation bias / entertainment networks.
Click to expand...

Then why is Fox listed as a Credible news source.....and MSNBC isn't? That would be from Fact Check.org and Politi-Fact.
 
MMC said:
Then why is Fox listed as a Credible news source.....and MSNBC isn't? That would be from Fact Check.org and Politi-Fact.
Click to expand...

There are no credible "news" sources in America. They're just entertainment shows with their own followings................
 
MaggieD said:
I can like that post! I don't doubt anything you've said -- even your last sentence. But bright lights should be welcomed not dimmed.
Click to expand...

i don't disagree. i just see that in this case, an entity which claims objectivity is using the tragedy as a political weapon. that really gets under my skin.

back when i was a conservative, Dan Rather was still one of my favorite anchors. in 2004, he kept running with a fake story about Bush and his National Guard record (including faked documents) in order to help John Kerry's presidential campaign. he was brought down by a poster named Buckhead at the cesspool known as Free Republic. CBS promptly fired him; i was somewhat sad to see him go, but i understood it. one of my problems with this whole story is that even if the preponderance of the evidence points the other way, no one at fox will be canned. it offends my respect for the scientific method. a scientist changes the theory in light of new data; a scientist does not choose data which supports the theory. i feel that this is what fox and msnbc do as part of their business model, and i am automatically skeptical of both sources.
 
Helix said:
i don't disagree. i just see that in this case, an entity which claims objectivity is using the tragedy as a political weapon. that really gets under my skin.

back when i was a conservative, Dan Rather was still one of my favorite anchors. in 2004, he kept running with a fake story about Bush and his National Guard record (including faked documents) in order to help John Kerry's presidential campaign. he was brought down by a poster named Buckhead at the cesspool known as Free Republic. CBS promptly fired him; i was somewhat sad to see him go, but i understood it. one of my problems with this whole story is that even if the preponderance of the evidence points the other way, no one at fox will be canned. it offends my respect for the scientific method. a scientist changes the theory in light of new data; a scientist does not choose data which supports the theory. i feel that this is what fox and msnbc do as part of their business model, and i am automatically skeptical of both sources.
Click to expand...

I think we ought to be skeptical of all of them. Especially in light of six corporations owning 90% of media outlets. That fact is spooky.
 
MMC said:
Then why is Fox listed as a Credible news source.....and MSNBC isn't? That would be from Fact Check.org and Politi-Fact.
Click to expand...

i disagree with the assertion that either are credible news sources.
 
MaggieD said:
I think we ought to be skeptical of all of them. Especially in light of six corporations owning 90% of media outlets. That fact is spooky.
Click to expand...

i agree.
 
Helix said:
what happened in Benghazi is that a small portion of a larger population which has been repressed by secular dictators and religious leaders finally boiled over, radicalized, and attacked the convenient demon, which happened to be us because we had a presence there. we also have a long history of activity in the middle east, and they hate us like we would hate them if Libya had a major presence and influence in Mexico and Canada. they basically caught us off guard, and we never should have been there in the first place. this, however, doesn't equate to an "all the way to the top" conspiracy and coverup.
Click to expand...

So in your opinion.....it doesn't matter that Team Obama denied this was even a terrorist attack from the beginning. But then later on stated it was. Course then the 23 Muslim Countries rising up and rioting us on the Anniversary of 911. Wasn't organized either?

Now we have the Boston Bombing and Right away this Administration is out on Front Street saying this has nothing to do with Foreign involvement. That these are some local guys. Yet once again we are now finding out. That team Obama was again wrong.
 
Bonzai said:
I got infracted for saying what we used to say to each other everyday on Politico (It was only a JOKE by the way)............go figure........................
Click to expand...

There are always other sites. I don't worry about infractions; I just post...
 
Bonzai said:
There are no credible "news" sources in America. They're just entertainment shows with their own followings................
Click to expand...

So, are you saying they are not credible showing live Coverage of Obama Speaking to the Press Corp, whenever he does so?
 
Helix said:
i don't disagree. i just see that in this case, an entity which claims objectivity is using the tragedy as a political weapon. that really gets under my skin.

back when i was a conservative, Dan Rather was still one of my favorite anchors. in 2004, he kept running with a fake story about Bush and his National Guard record (including faked documents) in order to help John Kerry's presidential campaign. he was brought down by a poster named Buckhead at the cesspool known as Free Republic. CBS promptly fired him; i was somewhat sad to see him go, but i understood it. one of my problems with this whole story is that even if the preponderance of the evidence points the other way, no one at fox will be canned. it offends my respect for the scientific method. a scientist changes the theory in light of new data; a scientist does not choose data which supports the theory. i feel that this is what fox and msnbc do as part of their business model, and i am automatically skeptical of both sources.
Click to expand...

I heard the report on the radio and it does sound plausible. Having either been in the military or worked for the military almost all my life I will say this. The State Department does not like security and even shuns security even when they should have it. I seen this plenty of times. The State Department will tell right up front their job is diplomacy and the strong presents of American troops they think hurts them in accomplishing their mission.

Now I am not say this was a factor, but just something to chew on as time goes by and this gets sorted out. They do have a very long history of trying to keep the military out of their business even if it means lax security. It is just a mind set with State.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom