• 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!

Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists[W:130]

jmotivator

Computer Gaming Nerd
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Messages
34,689
Reaction score
19,151
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists - The Daily Beast

"The State Department under Hillary Clinton fought hard against placing the al Qaeda-linked militant group Boko Haram on its official list of foreign terrorist organizations for two years. And now, lawmakers and former U.S. officials are saying that the decision may have hampered the American government's ability to confront the Nigerian group that shocked the world by abducting hundreds of innocent girls."

More Hilary dithering that resulted in tragedy.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

Risch and seven other GOP senators introduced legislation in early 2013 that would have forced Clinton to designate the group or explain why she thought it was a bad idea. The State Department lobbied against the legislation at the time, according to internal State Department e-mails obtained by The Daily Beast.

In the House, leading intelligence minded lawmakers wrote letter after letter to Clinton urging her to designate Boko Haram as terrorists. The effort in the House was led by then-Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King and Patrick Meehan, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.

Meehan and his Democratic counterpart Jackie Speier put out a lengthy report in 2011 laying out the evidentiary basis for naming Boko Haram a terrorist organization, including the group's ties to Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and to Somalia’s al-Shabab terrorist organization.


Unbelievable.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

"Dude that was two yeas ago."

I'll speak for Hillary Clinton. At this point, what difference does it make ?
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

Yeah, we wouldn't want to do anything to derail a real war on women.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

First, Boko Haram is it's own entity, Al Qaeda distances itself from them because Boko is too extreme. Only within the past few years have they claimed to be a Muslim religious group. They are and were simply a gang of murderers. They just got done killing 300 people with small arms fired. They locked up 40 young school boys in side a school and set fire to the building killing all inside. give up on trying to save the young women as they are most likely already distributed around the area and will be sold for approximately $12 per woman. They will now live as slaves and be instructed under the insane version of the Koran.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

This is a tough call. I think some of the groups they have on the list shouldn't be on there and I think the list lacks in names that should be on there. For a group I don't believe should be on there, MEK in Iraq. They are freedom fighters for Iran. They were mostly educated in US schools and funded through US groups.

Boko Haram sounds like they should be on that list. It is so political. Lists are so official.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

I'll speak for Hillary Clinton. At this point, what difference does it make ?
I always find it amusing when people dishonestly apply that quote out of context. It always shows them for the biased partisans they are and reminds me to never take their opinion seriously, as they cannot be bothered with the truth.

Thank you for reminding me of my personal stance on this issue.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists - The Daily Beast

"The State Department under Hillary Clinton fought hard against placing the al Qaeda-linked militant group Boko Haram on its official list of foreign terrorist organizations for two years. And now, lawmakers and former U.S. officials are saying that the decision may have hampered the American government's ability to confront the Nigerian group that shocked the world by abducting hundreds of innocent girls."

More Hilary dithering that resulted in tragedy.

There's no source to back up what its saying, whats worse it claims to have the source but it won't show us

Risch and seven other GOP senators introduced legislation in early 2013 that would have forced Clinton to designate the group or explain why she thought it was a bad idea. The State Department lobbied against the legislation at the time, according to internal State Department emails obtained by The Daily Beast.

If I could see the source, I may believe them. But uploading a pdf is too much for them I guess.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

I always find it amusing when people dishonestly apply that quote out of context. It always shows them for the biased partisans they are and reminds me to never take their opinion seriously, as they cannot be bothered with the truth.

Thank you for reminding me of my personal stance on this issue.


I think a lot of people share your stance.

Hillary Clinton said:
With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.

The bolded is what the Republican congress should be convening a committee on, instead of the umpteenth witch hunting expedition and raising political contributions on the deaths of these honorable Americans.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

I think a lot of people share your stance.



The bolded is what the Republican congress should be convening a committee on, instead of the umpteenth witch hunting expedition and raising political contributions on the deaths of these honorable Americans.

No, she lied to the faces of the families of the dead for political reasons and tried to make it sound like it was no big deal that she was that horrible. It does matter that she is that horrible of a person.

Also, the problem is that Hillary Clinton is so amazingly stupid that she thinks you can "ensure this never happens again" without understanding the cause. The thing is, the problem that needed to be fixed was that she was Secretary of State. Granted, John Kerry isn't really not a fix to that problem. I think that actually managed to make things worse.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

First, Boko Haram is it's own entity, Al Qaeda distances itself from them because Boko is too extreme. Only within the past few years have they claimed to be a Muslim religious group. They are and were simply a gang of murderers. They just got done killing 300 people with small arms fired. They locked up 40 young school boys in side a school and set fire to the building killing all inside. give up on trying to save the young women as they are most likely already distributed around the area and will be sold for approximately $12 per woman. They will now live as slaves and be instructed under the insane version of the Koran.

So your point is, Al Qaeda is the voice of reason?
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

I always find it amusing when people dishonestly apply that quote out of context. It always shows them for the biased partisans they are and reminds me to never take their opinion seriously, as they cannot be bothered with the truth.

Thank you for reminding me of my personal stance on this issue.

Translation: Benghazi, Nigeria, etc.....excuse me while I bury my head in the sand.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists - The Daily Beast

"The State Department under Hillary Clinton fought hard against placing the al Qaeda-linked militant group Boko Haram on its official list of foreign terrorist organizations for two years. And now, lawmakers and former U.S. officials are saying that the decision may have hampered the American government's ability to confront the Nigerian group that shocked the world by abducting hundreds of innocent girls."

More Hilary dithering that resulted in tragedy.


Heya JM. :2wave: Yep Bennett and his morning Crew were talking about this very subject. Which Bennett even had them validate that over the radio.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

No, she lied to the faces of the families of the dead for political reasons and tried to make it sound like it was no big deal that she was that horrible. It does matter that she is that horrible of a person.

Also, the problem is that Hillary Clinton is so amazingly stupid that she thinks you can "ensure this never happens again" without understanding the cause. The thing is, the problem that needed to be fixed was that she was Secretary of State. Granted, John Kerry isn't really not a fix to that problem. I think that actually managed to make things worse.

To her it was no Big deal.....that's why she never checked back on her people to see if they made it out or not. Hicks testified to that. Only time she called was when he talked to her.

Yep you're Right.....it got worse with Kerry now. First it was Dumb.....now its Dumber. :lol:
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

The State Department under Hillary Clinton fought hard against placing the al Qaeda-linked militant group Boko Haram on its official list of foreign terrorist organizations for two years. And now, lawmakers and former U.S. officials are saying that the decision may have hampered the American government's ability to confront the Nigerian group that shocked the world by abducting hundreds of innocent girls.



Risch and seven other GOP senators introduced legislation in early 2013 that would have forced Clinton to designate the group or explain why she thought it was a bad idea. The State Department lobbied against the legislation at the time, according to internal State Department e-mails obtained by The Daily Beast.

In the House, leading intelligence minded lawmakers wrote letter after letter to Clinton urging her to designate Boko Haram as terrorists. The effort in the House was led by then-Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King and Patrick Meehan, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.

Meehan and his Democratic counterpart Jackie Speier put out a lengthy report in 2011 laying out the evidentiary basis for naming Boko Haram a terrorist organization, including the group's ties to Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and to Somalia’s al-Shabab terrorist organization.

Unbelievable.
REALLY!!?? You guys are f'ing nuts. Hillary left Feb 1, 2013, so how long could she personally be responsible for this. Secondly you hardly find a more nutter man Risch, I was in Idaho the past 20+ years, so I can totally understand why Hillary would ignore him and assume he was being the usual rightwing drama queen.

The dates alone mean this is NOT in Hillary's court. Perhaps she simply chose to ignore it in "early 2013" since she knew she was leaving and felt that type of designation should be determined by the new head of state dept
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

REALLY!!?? You guys are f'ing nuts. Hillary left Feb 1, 2013, so how long could she personally be responsible for this. Secondly you hardly find a more nutter man Risch, I was in Idaho the past 20+ years, so I can totally understand why Hillary would ignore him and assume he was being the usual rightwing drama queen.

The dates alone mean this is NOT in Hillary's court. Perhaps she simply chose to ignore it in "early 2013" since she knew she was leaving and felt that type of designation should be determined by the new head of state dept

And her reason for ignoring the seven other Senators, the numerous letters she was being sent, as well as Jackie Speier's lengthy report in 2011, was that they were all drama queens?
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

Well, we wouldn't want our state department to offend musliims, would we?
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

Maybe she just wanted to make sure she could get a new "personal maid" when she wanted one.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

And her reason for ignoring the seven other Senators, the numerous letters she was being sent, as well as Jackie Speier's lengthy report in 2011, was that they were all drama queens?

It couldn't have been too lengthy if it started in "early 2013" and she left Feb 1, 2013. Sorry, just can't happen. Now you mention a 2011 report but it appears by what I'm reading that report was primarily pushed in .... "early 2013".

This is just more Hillary bashing. If y'all are really so upset, you need to be going after Hillary's successor.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

It couldn't have been too lengthy if it started in "early 2013" and she left Feb 1, 2013. Sorry, just can't happen. Now you mention a 2011 report but it appears by what I'm reading that report was primarily pushed in .... "early 2013".

This is just more Hillary bashing. If y'all are really so upset, you need to be going after Hillary's successor.

You apparently didn't read what you quoted.

In the House, leading intelligence minded lawmakers wrote letter after letter to Clinton urging her to designate Boko Haram as terrorists. The effort in the House was led by then-Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King and Patrick Meehan, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.

Meehan and his Democratic counterpart Jackie Speier put out a lengthy report in 2011 laying out the evidentiary basis for naming Boko Haram a terrorist organization, including the group's ties to Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and to Somalia’s al-Shabab terrorist organization.



Of course this is Hillary bashing. Kerry wasn't the one on the receiving end of those reports, letters, legislation, etc. He was still a US Senator then. The buck stopped with her until February 2013.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

You apparently didn't read what you quoted.

In the House, leading intelligence minded lawmakers wrote letter after letter to Clinton urging her to designate Boko Haram as terrorists. The effort in the House was led by then-Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King and Patrick Meehan, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.

Meehan and his Democratic counterpart Jackie Speier put out a lengthy report in 2011 laying out the evidentiary basis for naming Boko Haram a terrorist organization, including the group's ties to Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and to Somalia’s al-Shabab terrorist organization.



Of course this is Hillary bashing. Kerry wasn't the one on the receiving end of those reports, letters, legislation, etc. He was still a US Senator then. The buck stopped with her until February 2013.

I quoted the article as to when they started pressuring the state dept, which clearly says, "early 2013." Additionally as many have pointed out, the source for the article seems quite questionable.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

I quoted the article as to when they started pressuring the state dept, which clearly says, "early 2013." Additionally as many have pointed out, the source for the article seems quite questionable.

Then it seem you missed this part.

Risch and seven other GOP senators introduced legislation in early 2013 that would have forced Clinton to designate the group or explain why she thought it was a bad idea.....snip~


That's when they introduced legislation.....Hill-dog stepped down on Feb 1st.

Meehan and Speier did put out their Report in 2011 long before Hillary Stepped down.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

I always find it amusing when people dishonestly apply that quote out of context. It always shows them for the biased partisans they are and reminds me to never take their opinion seriously, as they cannot be bothered with the truth.

Thank you for reminding me of my personal stance on this issue.

The poster's partisanship has no impact on Hillary's incompetence.
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

There's no source to back up what its saying, whats worse it claims to have the source but it won't show us



If I could see the source, I may believe them. But uploading a pdf is too much for them I guess.

Harry Reid wrote the article?
 
Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

REALLY!!?? You guys are f'ing nuts. Hillary left Feb 1, 2013, so how long could she personally be responsible for this. Secondly you hardly find a more nutter man Risch, I was in Idaho the past 20+ years, so I can totally understand why Hillary would ignore him and assume he was being the usual rightwing drama queen.

The dates alone mean this is NOT in Hillary's court. Perhaps she simply chose to ignore it in "early 2013" since she knew she was leaving and felt that type of designation should be determined by the new head of state dept

Bush is still responsible for, well, everything, right? He left in 2009.
 
Back
Top Bottom